http://www.managementparadise.com/forums/human-resources-management-h-r/214504-o rganisational-structure-abbott-laboratories.

html CEO Miles White 3 Director William Smithburg 3 Director Roy Roberts 5 Director Roxanne Austin 3 Director William Daley 8 Director James Farrell 2 Director Laurance Fuller 2 Director Phebe Novakovic Director Lord Owen 3 Director William Osborn 4 Director Samuel Scott 3 Director Glenn Tilton 3 Director Edward Liddy Director Robert Alpern CFO Thomas Freyman Development RA Diagnostics Products EM Legal LS Nutrition HL Medical Devices JC 3 Pharmaceutical Products Richard Gonzalez Diabetes Care HM

Diagnostics BB Established Products MW Human Resources SF International Pharmaceuticals CA Medical Optics JM US Pharmaceuticals DP 2 Vascular Robert Hance Control GL 2 Internal Audit Thomas Dee Diagnostic Sales, EMEA JC Public Affairs CB 2 International Nutrition Thomas Chen 2 U.S. Nutrition SW Vascular Solutions CF Pharmaceutical Manufacturing... JL Marketing & Services, Pharma... MS 2 Pharmaceuticals, Research & ... JL Regulatory & Quality Science MB Government Affairs EL Wheelwright and Clark define scale executive structure among two boundaries; fun ctional organizations are planned according to industrial regulation. Higher fun ctional manager is responsible for apportioning assets. The accountability for e ntire creation is not owed to a solitary human being. Harmonizations occur all t he way through system and events, thorough stipulation, shared customs between e ngineers and meeting. Thus, light-weighted matrix association remain functional and height of occupation is analogous to that establish in the practical mode. T he position and influence puts value to the functional managers, since they have direct right of entry to functioning level community. The project members depar t their functional subdivision and dedicate full time to the development, share t he same location. The professionals are less specialized and have brioader tasks , skills and responsibilities. The functional manager is responsible for the per sonnel development and the more detailed technology research in the functional g roups . Several companies can be classified into organization structures. For exam ple, NASA developed a matrix management system for its space program because it needed to simultaneously emphasize several different functions and projects, non

e of which could be stressed at the expense of another. It found that traditiona l management structures were too practical, hierarchical, slow poignant, and inf lexible. NASA's matrix solution overcame problems by synthesize projects, such a s scheming rocket booster, with executive function, like staffing and finance. M ost structure departmentalize, employment and other resource. Functional organiz ations are segmented by key functions. For example, activities related to produc tion, marketing, and finance might be grouped into three respective divisions. W ithin each division, moreover, activities would be departmentalized into subdepa rtments. The marketing for example, might include sales, publicity, and support departments. The chief benefit of functionally structured organization is that t here typically realize reasonably capable occupation of labor and are moderately easy for employees to understand.