My entire fourteen year career has been with the military - both active duty and DoD civilian. All of my assignments have differed greatly depending on the branch (Air Force & Army), location, and mission. One thing that has not changed is the structure of each organization which has always been the functional structure discussed in the textbook (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). The functional structure is successful for the military for a variety of reasons. One is that the military has an enormous number of functions that are performed within most organizations. The functional structure keeps the roles and responsibilities clear for those assigned and also assist in keeping the chain of command clear.
I would like to point out that the military as a whole is more of a divisional structure. The textbook points out that the divisional structure is based on outputs versus function (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2013). The divisional structure applies to the military by creating divisions based on output: Air Force, Army, Marines, and the Navy (along with others). Within these branches are also divisional structures. For instance, each Army Battalion has a Budget, Logistics, and Operations Office located within. After this level is where you find the functional structure take over.
I cannot image any other structure being successful in the military environment. The matrix structure would result in a grey chain of command which is a core element of the military. A clear chain of command is vital for military operations, especially in a time of war where individuals need to easily understand where their orders should come from.
Respond to this case.
When Military has divisional structure there are many sub-divisional structures within the structure which cater to different situations. The divisional structure of Military structures the divisions as ...
A response to a military organizational structure case study.