There are seven different types of Organisation DNAs

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Different Types of DNA's:

There are seven different types of Organisation DNAs in which four are unhealthy DNAs and remaining three are healthy DNAs:

DNA Type



Compactable and apparently conflict-free, build agreement easily but struggles to implement agreed-upon plans.

Fits and Starts

Contain scores of smart, motivated and talented people who rarely commit in the same direction at the same time.


Too large and perplexed to be effectively operated by a small team but has to democratise decision-making confidence.

Over managed

Many layers of management create analysis paralysis in an often bureaucratic and highly political environment.


Driven by a small, involved senior team, succeeds mainly through the will and prevision of its leader

Just-in time

Inconsistent prepared for modify but turn on when necessary without losing vision on bigger picture.


Resilient adapt quickly to external market yet firmly focused on consistent business strategy.

Passive - Aggressive:

These are buzzing and smiley face organisation. They build agreement to make changes but it is hard to implement these changes. Lacking the authority, information and incentives needed to attempt meaningful changes such as line employees tends to neglect authorisation from headquarters. In this organisation, people pay to directive hypocrisy, putting enough attempts to appear compliant. Employees feel free to do because there are barely ever unpleasant result and the directive themselves are frequently misguided and therefore seem worthy of defiance. Passive-Aggressive organisations tend to endeavour for the mean. Here, mediocrity is not only accepted, it often promoted (Neilson, Pasternack & Van Nuys, 2006). They are extremely resistance to change, not because its people are subversive or ill - intent, but because it is easier not to object.

The behaviour of Passive - Aggressive organisation is inherently unhealthy and if it left unchecked then it spread like a disease slowly and sneakily. Decision shopping, suppressed information flow, avoidance of accountability and agreement-driven inertia are some of the signs of Passive-Aggressive organisation. In fact, this organisation is the most challenging to repair, as the dysfunctions it persists are so widespread and baneful (Dye, Kletter & McFarland, 2008). The worst case of passive - aggressive behaviour includes harmful attitude, such as sourness, negativity, procrastination, forgetting to do something, continuing lateness and inefficiency (Felps, Mitchell & Byington, 2006). This type of organisation has the most common organisational profile among seven different organisations that are going to identify. All the DNA building blocks in this organisation are effectively not in synchronisation. Accountability and authority (i.e. decision rights) are distinctively unclear and information is inaccessible to those who need it. Structure often misaligns with strategy and motivators are week to stop the dissemination of thwarting and finally, feeling of distrust.

To cure Passive - Aggressive behaviour, organisation has get into centre and transform its fundamental DNA. Only can they can see continuing and clear results. By definition, Passive - Aggressive culture, resist changes therefore, uniquely it is difficult to fix. To make changes, bind companies to tackle all four building blocks at once. Handling the project by building blocks is a fruitless exercise with paltry impact, as they are all dysfunctional (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). Cure has to be holistic and spanning. While the action plan has to build on a series of small steps that build on one another, the aim and the outcome of this redesign should be nothing but short transformation. Passive - Aggressive organisation are unable to take decisive action. Decisions are ignored, prohibited and hardly implemented even if they were made. Therefore, the main priorities in furnishing a Passive - Aggressive Organisation more effective is to apportion and clarify decision rights. These rights should be assign to those equip with appropriate information and able to effect the desired result.

The Fits - and - Starts Organisation:

The Fits - and - Starts Organisations attract intellectual, initiative and smart people with an entrepreneurial stooped; it has no restriction environment where you can accept the idea and run with it. However, in the absence solid foundation from below and strong direction from top, these initiatives either crash or simply knock out. It is deeply uncoordinated organisation. Its movement in the market are fitful and its messages are contradictory because of the underlying contradiction between its core building blocks (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). This type of organisations often thrive for years, but their management model unable to get mature as they flourish in scale and scope, often through skills. They are rich in resources and talents, but they do not have high skill management which necessary to corporate and tackle them efficiently.

Unlike, Overgrown and Overmanaged Organisation, Fits - and - Starts Organisations are decentralised (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). Here, corporate culture is persuade and cajole and entrepreneurial personality is polite rather than avoided. In Fits - and - Starts Organisation, the decision rights and information building blocks are incorporative. The decision makers' actions do not manifest a common aim or overall sense of direction, which leads to incoherent market movement. Here, top management is not firmly in control; they are either too disengaged or too weak to impress. As, the decision - making rules are efficiently in the hands of business unit, separate schedules procreate and corporate loses control. On the other hand, information languishes in the Fits - and - Starts Organisation. Administrators are unable to adapt strategy to change market conditions and managers unable to make optimal choices because of lack of complete information about rest of the company. It means that if decision rights and information does not coordinate then compensation and incentive schemes of Fits - and - Starts Organisations might get worse.

The Fits - and - Starts Organisations need a clear vision and focused goal to gather employees and guide their progress (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). Business units' has a tendency to act on individual schedules and maximise their divisional rather than corporate return, management need to spend more time and effort not only to develop plans but also to communicate their strategy and execute them. As decision rights are not clearly understood in this organisation, so there is a need for clarity on decision rights throughout the organisation. Employees need to understand their responsibility to support the overall objective and performance of the organisation.

The Outgrown Organisation:

The Outgrown Organisation is too large and perplexed to be effectively operated by a small team but has to democratise decision-making confidence. Therefore, much of the organisation potential remains unexploited. As power is hold at the top, so this organisation tends to respond slowly to market developments and often find them stuck in the middle. At the middle of this organisation, it might well see opportunities for positive changes but it is very hard to change it (Neilson, Pasternack & Mendes, 2003). Outgrown Organisation tends to operate from top down; the small group of senior managers takes most decisions. However, most of the information, which is relevant to these decisions, occupies elsewhere in the organisation, often in the field. Since much of the information never makes its way to the decision makers at the top, here, decisions are not as informed as they should be.

The centralised, top - down management structure of the Outgrown Organisation is not only responsible for its inability to get things done. Critical customer information and perceptiveness does not lift the organisation to where decisions are made. The organisation is slow to react to competitive developments and when it does, it does so reactively that sometime it misses vital opportunities. Outgrown Organisation generally does not have any layer and layers of decision - makers, so here it is clear who make decision and who is exalted (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). An isolated polices in executive offices that the managers in the field organise ways to circumvent their employees until exceptions becomes a rule. These proliferating workarounds are the indicators of the problems in the organisation. They hastily make substitute for failed or poor processes or policies.

If Outgrown Organisation is not performing well then executive suites are no more capable of making every crucial decision across the organisation. These people are isolated from the market and cannot absorb or process all the information that is going to accept among thousands of choices as this information fundamentally make a decision which is idiosyncratic and time sensitive (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). Senior management need to motivate their company entrepreneurial inheritance by assigning decision - making to business unit executives; who are close to customers and potentially success in executive offices. Then there might be some chances that the Outgrown Organisation increase their speed and strength of decision-making and improve their result.

The Overmanaged Organisation:

The Overmanaged Organisation effect from multiple layers of management and it move very slowly and reactively, often frequently pursuing opportunities later or less smartly than its rivals do. Here, management spend too much time on looking over the employees shoulders, outguessing their actions and making important decision without understanding the impact of it. They check the work of their employees rather than running down for new opportunities. Therefore, self - starters or result-oriented employees thwart by this often bureaucratic and highly political organisation. There is lot of wasted effort and dead information in Overmanaged Organisation. Ritual promotion covers the corporate ladder the assure mediocrity dominates over merit. The Overmanaged Organisations are highly Centralized (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). This centralisation serves many companies but it has run amuck. Like the Outgrown Organisation, the Overmanaged Organisation operates from top-down, but Overmanaged Organisation is broad from mid - section. In fact, in this organisation employee need to go through each layers of management to get things done.

In Overmanaged Organisation, there are many layers, so line employees kept apart from the top management, who never try to command and control them. By the time management look on it, it is too late. Here, employees fail to change important strategies and operational decisions quickly into actions. Unclear ownership and accountability for actions uphold irresponsible or discrepant behaviour. Internal conflicts result from non - coordinate motivators among different departments and functions. Overmanaged Organisations are often slow and ineffective because of their political and bureaucratic environment (Mendes et al., 2004). Here, information is so poor up and down the organisation; senior manager and line manager are never on the same page regarding the key issue of business. If the senior management lacks important market, information from the field than line managers lacks data on how their division is contributing to overall company performance (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006).

In Overmanaged Organisation, the objective of rightsizing and recreating the organisation is the opportunity to raise the revenue by contouring decision - making, enhancing customer response and innovation. However, to achieve these benefits it requires an approach of restructuring. Curing the Overmanaged Organisation needs a new approach to decision making. Management need to consider each decision making condition separately, there are generally two approaches of decision-making (Mendes et al., 2004). First is reconfirming an essential centralised decision making process. Second is reallocating decision right more broadly all over the company. Generally, centralised decision making is consider more appropriate for decisions including customer risk, financial, strategic. However, decisions that have less impact on individual business units are consider for re - allocating.

Just - in - Time Organisation:

The Just - in - Time Organisation is fundamentally a healthy organisation as it is able to enforce important strategic and operational decisions rapidly. It has ability to change direction quickly when necessary, without losing perceptivity of bigger picture (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006, a). Just - in - Time Organisation, attract talented and motivated individuals. Here, frequently agitated and fun environment and great place to learn. An adventurous attitude often inculcates the office and incites staff and volunteers to turn into truly creative, often generating real breakthrough. However, in the absence of uniform, disciplined processes and structures, the organisation can neither fully capitalise on these chances nor replicate them. However, it manages to hold good people and do well financially, yet this organisation does not attain top performance. They miss opportunities by inches rather than miles. Therefore, despite of its thwarting, yet it is the challenging place to work. People in Just - in - Time Organisation agree that important strategies and operational decisions are immediately convert into actions (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006, a). Furthermore, these organisations are very quick and readily adapt any discontinuous change in the market.

Just - in - Time Organisations are energies by a strong sense of mission. They always want to include new territory, urge changes and make a big difference. As they always attract people of similar minded, therefore, they always look for the chance to get involved early in a venture and build something that has meaning and purpose. There are generally two distinct groups in the Just - in - Time Organisation: the adventure - seeking mavericks and the more cautious, professional managers (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). Mavericks consider the amorphous environment and filtered resources of the organisation with a certain affection. They always find the work satisfying because it is either highly lucrative financially or a significant in its impact. These mavericks give a sense of breathless expectation and energy. The managers, on the other hand, lack in passion and they keep themselves discipline and skilful. They are more reliable and stable as compare to their maverick colleagues. The Just - in - Time Organisation support the mavericks but it also rests on its continued good health to its managers.

This organisation is healthy; it gets things done and it supplies its people lot of agitation and intellectual stimulation. However, to avoid going itself bothered and passing into a state of unhealthy, the Just - in - Time Organisation should stress on preventive treatment rather than drastic remediation. As, these organisations are always rely on their employees skills and talents, therefore, they need to set clear decision rights and procedures that lead into actions. Unplanned, decision making does not deliver uniform result; the organisation need to bring in more discipline and structure to maintain its success. Here, management need to clarify decision rights and support the decision makers with right information and system (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006, a). The organisation should not only define its business process well, but also they ensure that they bound to it in a disciplined manner. This organisation proves that it can deliver, but now it needs to prove that it can deliver efficiently and consistently.

The Military Precision Organisation:

The Military Precision Organisation is hierarchal and works under a highly controlled management model. It can consider and execute bright strategies, which use repeatedly by practising them throughout the organisation and run it in every scenario. The biggest ongoing challenge of this organisation is preparing for the development beyond the incumbency of its current leadership (Bussmann et al., 2008). Talented people need to be train to release their full potential and to provide success within the organisation. Furthermore, feedback loop need to be send to assure that top management understand what is happening at the other levels. The Military Precision Organisation can be dangerous due to sudden shift in the market environment, as they do not distinctively deal well with substantial and unexpected change (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). The organisation perform like a well - trained team, where, there is rule book and the team exercise it over and over, until they are instinctive. Accordingly, when one of rule book scenarios arises and the organisation knows how to execute it efficiently. The challenge occurs when the game change by itself, means, when the market in which Military Precision Organisation operates change suddenly and unexpectedly. In this situation, management need to come up with new strategies and roll them quickly.

The Military Precision Organisation certifies certain distinguishing attributes: consistent, disciplined and lean operation and well - defined chain of command. The reason why the Military Precision Organisation is healthy and effective is that here, information and motivators are aligned with their decision rights (Knott and Neilson, 2006). Here, decision rights are clearly defined and controlled. Roles and responsibility are univocal and the direction from top management is straight - forward and unambiguous. This is well - keep, well - defined organisation that is thoughtful to the most details and serve unswervingly to customers. The fundamental advantage of the Military Precision Organisation that it is less expensive than the other decentralised Organisations. These organisations only mean with business that accomplish large volumes of similar proceedings on a daily basis. Here, the opportunities to leverage fixed cost and unite purchasing power are substantial. The formula of the lean and mean behaviour of the Military Precision Organisation is its consistency. These Organisations have made their mark around the consistency of service, product and experience they delivering to their customers. They built their business model around the consistency of their procedures and processes (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006).

The Military Precision Organisation is having highly disciplined management structure, which can be rigid and unyielding in the face of sudden competitive menace. To deliver consistent and efficient performance, the Military Precision Organisations have to be clear, firm and redundant in the direction is goes down. Information flows both ways in this organisation as in healthy organisation; the distinction is the fluidity of the information (Neilson, G., Pasternack, B.A. & Mendes, D, 2003). The Military Precision Organisation leans not to be stuck in the lengthy debate, discussion or management withdraws. These organisations communicates a lot, the format of their exchange tends to very scheduled and structure. Furthermore, the top - down management of the organisation can deter some of the people from speaking out. This is a natural trend in any controlled environment of the organisation, where people unable to say to their top management what they think management want to hear. To overcome from this trend, management need to boost their confidence. Institutionalise and create a feedback loops so that employees and customers can express their concerns and complaints (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006).

The Resilient Organisation:

The Resilient Organisation is a sufficient flexible to adapt rapidly to change internal customer priorities and external market shifts, yet this organisation remains firmly focused on and adjusted with a coherent technology and business strategy. This self - correcting and forward-looking organisation expect changes routinely and accosts them actively. This organisation attracts motivated employees and offers them exciting working environment as well as resources and authority to solve complex problems effectively (Katz, Kumar & Neilson, n.d.). Resilient Organisation is the healthiest organisation among all the other organisations type. This organisation has the power to flourish no matter what the economical climates are. To become resilient, organisations need management system that ease, rather innovation, experimentation and frustrate. Here, capital and talent should free to flow to their best, wherever they come from. Companies should be ready to change not only their business model and product, but also their goals and aspirations (Hamel, 2004). According to Neilson and Pasternack (2006), "the research confirm that people in Resilient Organisations report 'better than average' profitable more often than do respondents from any other organisational type. In resilient organisation, every policy, process and position has a purpose and that purpose is coordinate with the strategically objectives of the organisations. It does not mean that Resilient Organisation are problem - free, once achieved, it is not be maintained without regular effort.

The trademark of the Resilient Organisation is the unseamed manner in which all the four building blocks incorporate with one other to drive the organisation and its performance forward. Most Resilient Organisations are known for their seething and continuous transformations. To incite employees and move the organisation ahead, management need to remove the goal posts, distinctively every few years whether or not they feel any competition or not (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). These transformations schedules are base on the foundation values and principles of the organisation. They have distinctly defined end states where everyone understands their goals. Here, building blocks are designed and coordinate to alleviate their progress, so that everyone has the right information, authority and incentive to be efficient. The key of this organisation is its clear communication of objectives, with gently applied target. In a new flexible organisations technology is a vital factor because it enables the senior managers to make beneficial information and convey these decisions to the people faster (Partridge, 2006). Here, the information flow produces transparency inside and across the layers of the organisation. Lower levels of the organisation understand the company direction and priorities. This perceptiveness helps in assuring activities and resources to spread the alliance with these priorities.

The Resilient Organisation does not follow the style. They do not even yield to the latest business crazes. These organisations make their strategies based on information and instincts, and they stay on these strategies as long as their own market intelligence confirms it. The Resilient Organisation trusts their people and their capability to make efficient decisions and accomplish them still as strategic aim change. They have a solid base built around their core measures that not only guide their decision - making but also motivate and inspire their employees at all levels (Neilson & Pasternack, 2006). Even the Resilient Organisation face hurdles. Healthy DNA cannot protect the organisation from all external risk factors; however, it helps in quick internal reaction. When these organisations face any discontinuity in the market, any economic downturn or competitive challenge, they observe it early and call up a response quickly. They develop and charge internal mechanism for detecting and correcting troubles before they reach at profit warning proportion. As the all the four DNA building blocks gets refine over time, the overall Resilient Organisation becomes more quick and intelligent. These Organisations tends to be more efficient and quick to develop and commercialize new service and product than any other organisation types. The advantages of more efficient coactions show in its high quality services and products that strike the market leading the competitors (Bordia, Kronenberg & Neely, 2005).