MEANING OF CENTRALISATION

. Centralisation means the concentration of formal authority at the top levels of an

organisation. It is a tendency aimed at centralised performance. Hence, it is the ' opposite of dispersal anddelegation of authority: It has an important bearing on the processes of policy form.ulation and decision-making. ~ h e s tew o major areas of management or administration are the! reserves of the top management in acentralised organisation. The lower levels of the organisational hierarchy always look upwards for . direction, advice, clarification, interpretation, etc. ~ v e n ' t hfeie ld units or agencies of the parent organisation do not,enjoy any authohty of decision-making and hence are fully dependent on the central authority, The fieldunits are reqaired tb implement the decisions in accordance with the pre-determined guidelines as handed down to them by the headquarters operating as the central authority. Centralisation acquires its acute 'I form when an organisation operates from a single location i.e., when it does not have any field agencies. In the words of Harold Koont!!, "Centralisation has been usid to describe tendencies other than the~dispersaol f authority,.. . . ~t'oftenre fers to ' departmental activities; service divisions, centralised similar or specialised actifrities'in a single department. But when centralisation is discussed as an aspect of management, it refers to delegating or withholding authority and the authority dispersal or , conceiltration in decision-making?'. Therefore, centralisation can be regarded as
.
3

Concepts in organisation-I concentration

of pllysical facilities and/or decision maldng authority. Limited and restrictive use of delegation is, in other words, centralisation. Henri Fayol, while talking of decentralisation and ccntralisation, observes, "everything that goes ro increase the importance of subordinate's role is decentralisation, everytliing which goes to decrease it is centralisation"

25.3 MEANING OF DECENTRALISA'FION

The term decentralisation is understood differently by different individuals or groups. Louis A. Allen refers to it as one of the most confused and confusing of the administrative techniques that characterises the art and science of professional management. To quote Pfiffner and Sherwood, ''In some respects decentralisation has come to be a 'gospel' of management. Firstlyit is regarded as a way of life to be adopted as least partially on faith; secondly, it is an idealistic concept, with ethical roots in democracy, thirdly, it is in the beginning a more difficult way of life because it involves a change in behaviour running counter to historically-rooted culture patterns of mankind. That is why the new literature of decentralisation dwells on how to bring about change in organisation behaviour. Men find it difficult to delegate, to think in terms of the abstractions required by long-term planning, to 1isten.rathcr than to give orders, to evaluate other men and their work in terms of overall results instead of irritations and tensions of the moment. Yet this is the very key to the behaviour recluired of leaders in a decentralised organisation". It is amply clear that decerltralisation is not only a device for the delegation or dispersal of administrative authority, hut it is also a democratic method of devolution of political authority. Further, in a decerltralised organisation it is also esscntisl to adopt t!~e democratic norms. Such norms help the various levels of the administrative organisation to develop a reasonable capability for the exercise of authority to reach the most desired decisions. Moreover, they help to assimilate in them the virtues of greater interactions hot o11ly among the various organisational levels but also between the organisation and the clientele [among the general public. It has been opined that decentralisation refers to the physical location of fiicilities and the extent of dispersal of authority throughout an organisaticrn. Hence, it is an

arrangement by which the ultimate authority to command and the ultimate responsibility for results is localisedin units locatcd i r d~i fferent parts of the country. It is argued that assigning of functions and responsibility, for their efficient and eflective performance, to the subordinates or sub-divisions is the essence trf derentrttlisation. We may say that in a decentralised organisation lower levels are allowed to decide niany matters and a few cases involving major policies or interpretations are referred to the higher levels of the organisation. However, in commonphraseolugy the t c n~l decentralisation is interchangeably used with terms like deconcentration, devolution and delegation, though they have different connotations. Devolution has political and legal authority ramifications, deconcentration and delegation refer only to administrative authority. Decentralisationcovers the political, legal and atimini4trative spheres of authority.

25.4 TYPES OF DECENTRALISATION

Four different types of decentralisation can be identified viz., administrative. functional, political and geographical. Administrative decentralisation refers to decentralisation of authority to the lower officials in the administrative hierarchy of' organisations. It may also mean decentralising powers or functions to the subordinate units. Functional decentralisation implies that the functions are decentralised to the specialised units or departments like,education or health. Political decentralisation involves that the political powers and functior~cs oncentrated in the hands of higher level political organs are decentralised to lower [evel political organs. You are all :]ware that panchayati raj agencies are units of decentralisation wherein political powers of decision making are decentralised from state ~ovcrninentto ~anchnvntr;s.: lmi~isa nd zila parishads. Finally, in geographical decentralisation. the powers and functions oi' headquarters are decentralised to the field offices for effective performance for
>-

example, most of the powers of the heads of departments of the state government are cpntrnllsPtionand
DeecntrPlisPlion

decent ral i~eto~ t heir field officers at the regional and district levels. This facilitates @ck decision making keeping in view the local requirements.

25.5 FACTORS AFFECTING WNTRALISATIBN AND DECENTRALISATION

Centralisation and decentrqlisation, being the two extremes of operations of authority, are relative terms. We, today, cannot think of an organisation which is completely centralised or decentralised as in between the operations of the two there is always a continuum of authority. They need to be v~eweda s complementary to each other as a fair combination of the two results in stability, accountability, efficiency and ,effectiveness. Their applications in a democratic setup would depend upon the objectives of the organisation, its life and size, nature of service, etc. It has been said that in order to ensure its existenoe, an qrganisation has to perform certain functions which are basically centralising in nature and effect: Moreover, their performance has to be from a central point of authority. Two such major functions are initiation and decision-making in relation to basic management functions like planning, organking, motivating, coordinating and controlling the work of the subordinates as also of the field units. Thus, the higher levels by performing the functions~ofi nitiation and decision-making tend to reserve the real authority at the central points of the organisation. On the other hand, Earnest Dale points out that the degree of decentra1isation.i~gr eater in the following situations: i) The greater the number of decisions made at lower level of management hierarchy, the greater the degree of decentralisation. ii) The rpore important the decisions made at lower level of management, the greater the degree of decentralisation. For example; when the head of the field unit enjoys
1
\..

the authority of sanctioning financial investments or expenditure without consulting any one else. iii) 1na decentralised authority structure, more dedisions are taken at lower levels which affect most of the functions of the organisation as a whole. Thus, the organisatio'ns which hermit only operational decisions to be made at separate branch units are less decentralised than those which also permit financial and ' personnel decisions at branch units. 'ivy When less checking is required on the decision. Decentralisation is greater when no check at all is made; it is less whenpsuperiors have to be informed of the decision after it has been made; still less if superiors have to be consulted before the decision is made. When fewer are consulted and if they are at a lower level in the organisation's hierarchy, the degree of decentralisation is more. , It is, therefore, clear that the application of the two concepts is greatly ir$luenced by factors moreqthan one. In modern times when we have a multiplicity of administrative and political organisations, there is a need to use the centralised and decentralised patterns of authority for the maximum.benefit of the people. That is a pre-requisite of a welfare or service state. There has beeii a growing public opinion in fqvour of decentralisation but at the same time some political forces and the bureaucracy do not favour a decentralised system for obvious reasons. Pfiffner and Sherwood comment, that "Qecentralisation will always experienc& a certain amount of epidemic conflict between those whose purpose is to cbordinate and those whoresist coordination. What is needed'is to learn a way of life in which the coordinating process will be least restrictive, in-whidh people can pursue their individual goals to the maximum and yet work in harmony towird group goals with others who look upon things differently" As'a'lready pointed out, decentralisation has political and administrative elements. However, in management or far administrative organisations it is seen as an administrative device of locating the authority of decision-making in a dispersed manger. To.th2 contrary, centralisatiqn is viewed as concentration of authority in the top management. Examining the two cpncepts in terms of physical facilities -plant, persan.nel and equipmerit6 and authority,'Mervin Kohn opines that a typicai 0rg:rnisatio~e xhibits characteristics of both. He has frimed four p~ssiblecombinations
4 r(

and calls thelil as centralisation-decentrarisation martix which in reproduced below. CENTRALISED DECENTRALISED

- 49

(concentrated) Plant, Product, services and Personnel, busigess functions Equipment concentrated in one (Facilities) building or in several buildings within a localised aria. (dispersed) Products, services and business functions scattered in many areas; multi-plant operation; each sub-unit is a separate entity; may be autonomous self-sufficient entity performing most major business functions. Authority

(Decision-making) High degree of concent- High degree of delegation and ration and retention dispersion of decision making of decision-making at horizontally or vertically upper levels of management; downward to lower levels of subordinates highly management; subordinates dependent. relatively;ndependent; "Profit Centre" concept. The above figure gives us four possible combinations and the extent of centralisation and decentralisation differs in all of them. Now we explain these combinations as under: 1 The first combination indicates a high degree of concentration of facilities as also of authority in the top levels of the organisation hierarchy. These levels also perform all the management functions of decision-making and directing their effective implementation. Such an organisation may exist under the government especially dealing with sensitive subjects like defence or some aspects of defence production and also in some situations in the ministry of foreign affairs.,It is a case of minimal or no delegation of authority. In private industry it resembles the units operating under single or family ownership whose area of operation is smaIl or well manageable bj the owners. 2 The second combination results in an organisation whose physical facilities are centralised at one place. In,other words, the products and services are centralised but the decision-making. authority is delegated horizontally and vertically. The level to which the authority of decision-making is delegated remains accountable to the . higher levels for effective management as its decisionsmust be in conformity with the overall policy of the top manzgement. Such type of situation may befound in service agencies like the State Trading Corporation or the agencies concerned with foodgrain procurement and engaged in the public distribution system like the PUNSUP in the state of Punjab, 3 Thirdly, we may come across an organisation in which physical facilities are dispered among various units located in various partsof the country or a regidn but the major I
,

deeision-making authority is centralised in the top levels of management. The units may be vested with only small authority like sanctioningof leave, overtime, etc. Thus authority to perform a limited number of management functions, which are consequeritial of the major policies, is delegated so as to enable them to implement the minor aspects of the major'policies. Significant and major policy matters are reserved to the top management and are located at the central office or the headquarters. Various road transport organisations both in the public and, private sectors, largely fall in this category. 4 Lastly, a situation in which both the physical facilities and the deeision-making aut'hority is dispersed or decentralised between various levels and the units, we get an organisation based on administrative decentralisation or deconcentration. Such an organisation performs wide ranging fuhctions and the units are allowed significant , functional autonomy. TheHindustan Machine Tools Ltd., falls to a great extent, in this category. Mervin Kohn also refkrs to the 'profit centre' concept as part of this model of organisation. It may be mentioned that this concept can only be applied to private businks which is largely run on profit motive. However, in government orgadsiltions. profit is seen in terms of productivity or social and economic gains that
a

. are advantageous to the nation as a whole or to a seaion of the people.for whom a particular
service is sperzifically intended. ,
I
v

We may siiy that the adoption of one or a mix of both would depend upon the Centralhtbn and
Dtrentrallsation

organisation and its objectives, the nature of functions, the products or services, long term plans and the overall strateg~..o f production and marketing. Hence, the equilibrium between centralisation and decentralisation would vary with the internal and external forces in operation. "Internal forces emanate from the requirement of the principle of hierarchy based on the superior-subordinate relationships, on the one hand, and the nature of services, on the other. External forces axe based on the relationship with the clientele, on the one hand, and the environment in which the organisation functions, on the other". Much would depend on the maturity of the people and levels of development in a country. In the words of Muttalib, ".. . the operation of the principle of hierarchy may not exhibit much authoritarianism when members of the organisations and the clientele are drawn from,a society that value greatly the egalitarian concept". Fw the success ufpoliti~aal nd admipishtiw41 decentralisation, Pfiffner and Sherwood suggest that decentralisation needs, very careful treatment for achieving the desired benefits. Moreover, it requires maturity and character, not only on the part of the individual members of the organisation but also in the culture of the larger society as well as the subculture of the organisation itself. Check Your Progress 1 Vote: i) Use the space below for your answers. ii) Check your answers with those given,at the end of the unit. 1 What is centralisation? In what way does it differ from decentralisation? 2. What factors contribute to greater decentralisation?

...................................................................................................
3 Explain Mervin Kohn's centralisation-decentralisation matrix.
.- 1

25.6 MIERII'SS AND DEMERITS OF CENTRALISATION

Now we shall qnalyse the merits and demerits of the concepts of centralisation and decentralisati~nO. rganisations based on the principle of centralisation provide central direction both in the formulation and the execution of policies and programmes. In the words of Lou$ A. Allen, such a; organisation facilitates the introduction of dynamism in the organisation through the active role of personal leadership; helps in integrated
I

- .-.
- concrp~sin ~rganisation-II approach foecarrying out organisational operations which result in uniformity of action. Moteover, this concept is quite handy in emergencies and for dealing with . unanticipated matters. Merits of Centralisation a) It is .eaSier to develop uniform policies and, practices in a centralised organisation. Moreover, it can effectively achieve conformity to the prescribed procedures and can bring about better coordination among the various units and levels of the organisation. b) Such a system further adds to the prestige and influence of the top executives. Authority being concentrated at the top level, it is easier to identify the key person1 persons who exercise the real author i t~T his is helpful in creating a suitable climate for fulfilling the aspirations of those executives or leaders who prefer to combine
I

prestige with real organisational operations. I c) If process of centralisation is strengthened, duplication in an administrative organisation can be avoided. d) It has been claimed by Menin Kohn that a centralised organisatioh deveTops a corporate personality by enabling the full utilisation of the personnel and the equipment in organisation.
4

It may be said that the merits of centralisationare very much limited and can largely be obtained in small sized organisations. m ow eve^, in bigger organisations it becomes a n obstacle for effective polioy formulation and its implementation. ~ eme r i tosf Centralisation a) A centralised organisation does not allow the development of second line of executives as all the lower levels are more dependent on the orders and directions of the top executives. The emergent situations require immediate decisions for reaching the desired solytions. In a centralised organisation, if erpergencies arise at the unit level, their solutions becomes difficult by the unity itself as they do not enjoy any decision makirig authority.
(1

b) The concept of centralisation works against the possible diversification or expansion of the organisation. The local needs of the organisation cannot be understood in the right perspective by the centralised executive.
1I

c) There is a minimum use of the concept of delegation of authority because real authority always lies in the top levels of the organisation. Thus for a decision on every matter, the top executive has to be approached. Therefore, such an aorganisation concentrates all decisional authority in a few persons and makes majority of the personnel only as implementers of orders received from above. d) As the subordinates have to approach the superiors for taking even minor decisions, the work in the organisation suffers and unnecessary delay is caused.

25.7 MERITS AND DEMERITS OF DECENTRALISATION.

1

It has been observed by many scholars that in a decentralised organisation lowe~level ' managemdnt hierarchy enjoys considerable decision making authority and the number 1 of decisions made at the lower levels is quite large as compared to the decisions taken at the top levels of the organisation.

. hierits of Decentralisation I
a) decentralised organisation 'is more responsive'to the needs anddemands of the local area and the people. It can understand and assess the real problems and,can . . take decisions for their effective solutions. The local government institutions in . Britain enjoy a substantial authority for dealing with local problems. In the Indian I context, the local government institutions have been given some limited authority for taking decisions at the local level. , .

6)

Delegation of authority is an essential aspect of a decentralited orginisation. The

: higher levelorganisations share their authority with the lower level orgqnisations.

i In the process the top levels deal with very important matters; whereas, the lower
levels are left free to tackle less important issues. Hence unnecessary burden on top management is avoided. c) A decentralisedorganisation encourages innovations as it welcomes creative ideas

and new techniques recommeqded by the lower levels of the Gganisation. Moreover, this system tries to assimilate the best of the generalist and specialist personnel working in the organisation. It leads to more interaction among the personnel. Futther, a decentralised system encourages the expansion of the organisation and permits desirable diversification for effective achievement of goals. Louis 4. Allen observes that a decentralised organisation helps to: i) base the burden on top executives or on those who operate from the central points ii) facilitate 'diversificatibn iii) make decisions at the scene of action for effective and fruitful delivery of goods and services I iv) encourage development of meaningful talents v) improye motivation of people within the organisation
/

Apart from various advantages of decentralisation there are many draw backs of this , system too. Some scholars feel that decentralisation may lead to disintegration and may considerably weaken the top levels of an ,organisation. Demerits of Decentralisation a) In 4 decentiiiiised organisation communication among various levels becomes ' difficult. At times the message communicated from top becomes blurred and changes its contents and meaning when it reaches the concerned individual in the organisation. Moreover, geographical distancedalso create problems in the way oq effective communication and control systems. b) It is very difficult to introduce effective system of coordination both at policy making '. and policy iniplementation levels.
'

Centralisation and Decentralisation

..
' c) It leadqto overlapping and duplication of efforts in most of the organisations as they fail to clearly identify and define the activities and responsibilities in precise terms. Duplication in the performance of staff functions is a rule rather than an exce'ption in a decentralised organisation. d) It may become difficult to maintain desired uniformity in the standards in d,ecision making due to comparatively less control of the higher levels df the organisation. e) The decentralised system necessarily results in higher costs of its operational aktivities. For such a situatiqn there can be many factors but one easily identifiable factor is the underutilisation of the availab1.e talent in the organisation.