Business.com aims to help business owners make informed decisions to support and grow their companies. We research and recommend products and services suitable for various business types, investing thousands of hours each year in this process.
As a business, we need to generate revenue to sustain our content. We have financial relationships with some companies we cover, earning commissions when readers purchase from our partners or share information about their needs. These relationships do not dictate our advice and recommendations. Our editorial team independently evaluates and recommends products and services based on their research and expertise. Learn more about our process and partners here.
Henry Mintzberg’s 10 Management Roles and Organizational Design
Discover the business management concepts developed by scholar and writer Henry Mintzberg and explore their relevance for small enterprises.
Table of Contents
Henry Mintzberg is a Canadian management theorist who focused on what managers actually do at work. He described 10 everyday roles that managers play, grouped into three types: working with people (interpersonal), ing information (informational) and making decisions (decisional). He also showed that strategy often grows from experience and learning, not just from a master plan. Beyond that, he explained how different ways of organizing a company affect how people coordinate and how well the company performs. His work connects classroom ideas with real-world business management.
Mintzberg’s theory and principles give leaders clear, practical maps for how to structure teams and run organizations. His approach helps avoid one-size-fits-all solutions by matching structure and roles to the situation. He emphasizes learning, judgment and collaboration over rigid rules, leading to more humane and effective management. Whether in a startup, a professional firm or a large company, his ideas help diagnose problems, balance control with flexibility and adapt strategy over time. That’s why his frameworks remain a go-to guide for building organizations that work.
Mintzberg’s 10 managerial roles explained
Mintzberg’s groundbreaking research identified 10 distinct managerial roles that capture the multifaceted nature of management work. These roles are organized into three primary categories, each representing a fundamental aspect of managerial responsibility: interpersonal interactions, information management and strategic decision-making. This framework provides managers with a systematic understanding of their diverse responsibilities and offers a roadmap for professional development across all dimensions of leadership.
Interpersonal roles
The interpersonal category encompasses the manager’s unique position as a point of contact within and outside the organization, stemming from their formal authority. These roles focus on building relationships, leading teams and representing the organization in various contexts.
- Figurehead
The figurehead role involves performing social, ceremonial and legal responsibilities that represent the organization. Managers serve as symbolic leaders who motivate teams and provide a source of power and authority for their people. This role requires building a positive organizational image through various formal activities.
Examples: Signing official documents, attending industry conferences, participating in community events, representing the company at award ceremonies
- Leader
The leader role is considered the most pivotal as it demonstrates the extent to which a manager’s potential is realized. This role encompasses both direct leadership through hiring and training, and indirect leadership through encouragement and motivation. Leaders influence people by giving them a sense of purpose to reach organizational goals.
Examples: Conducting performance evaluations, providing mentoring and coaching, setting team objectives, creating development opportunities for subordinates
- Liaison
In the liaison role, managers develop and maintain internal and external relationships, serving as a connection link that bridges gaps between employees at different organizational levels. This role involves building a network of contacts that can be leveraged for information, resources and opportunities.
Examples: Networking at professional associations, maintaining relationships with suppliers and customers, coordinating with other departments, building partnerships with external organizations
Informational roles
The informational category positions the manager as the nerve center of their organizational unit, responsible for gathering, processing and disseminating critical information. These roles capitalize on the manager’s unique understanding of internal operations and external intelligence.
- Monitor
The monitor role requires managers to continuously seek information necessary to understand their organization and environment. They scan both internal and external sources to identify problems, opportunities and potential industry changes. This role involves gathering often undocumented information transmitted through informal channels.
Examples: Reading industry reports, attending staff meetings, monitoring competitor activities, tracking key performance indicators, staying informed about regulatory changes
- Disseminator
In the disseminator role, managers share information with those who need it, both in verbal and written forms. This involves filtering and deciding what information is most important to communicate internally. The role encompasses sharing both factual information and value-based insights from various organizational levels.
Examples: Conducting team briefings, distributing policy updates, sharing market intelligence with relevant departments, communicating strategic direction to subordinates
- Spokesperson
The spokesperson role requires managers to represent and speak for their organization to external audiences. They defend company interests and aim to make the organization look favorable to potential clients, existing customers and the general public.
Examples: Presenting at industry events, conducting media interviews, communicating with government agencies, representing the organization in public forums or board meetings
Decisional roles
The decisional category represents the culmination of interpersonal and informational activities, where managers use their relationships and knowledge to make strategic decisions that drive organizational success. These roles involve different types of decision-making situations that managers encounter regularly.
- Entrepreneur
As entrepreneurs, managers initiate and drive change within their organizations. This role involves identifying growth opportunities, developing innovative solutions and implementing new strategies or processes. Entrepreneurs are proactive change agents who ensure their organizations remain competitive.
Examples: Launching new products or services, implementing process improvements, leading digital transformation initiatives, developing strategic partnerships
- Disturbance Handler
The disturbance handler role requires managers to solve problems as they arise, dealing with unexpected events beyond their control. Unlike the proactive entrepreneur role, this reactive position focuses on maintaining productivity when crises occur.
Examples: Managing client complaints, addressing employee conflicts, handling supply chain disruptions, responding to competitive threats or market downturns
- Resource Allocator
In the resource allocator role, managers determine how and where to apply organizational resources, including money, equipment, people, time and facilities. This central role involves scheduling, programming work and authorizing actions while working within resource constraints.
Examples: Setting departmental budgets, assigning staff to projects, approving capital expenditures, prioritizing resource allocation across competing initiatives
- Negotiator
The negotiator role involves participating in negotiations to reach organizational goals, both with external parties and internal stakeholders. Managers represent organizational interests while working to secure favorable agreements and resolve conflicts.
Examples: Negotiating contracts with vendors, mediating disputes between departments, discussing terms with clients, resolving salary or resource allocation disagreements
Mintzberg’s organizational design principles
Mintzberg’s framework treats organizational design as a problem of achieving “fit” among three structural dimensions — key parts of the organization, prime coordinating mechanisms and degree of decentralization — to create coherent configurations that match an organization’s goals and environment.
1. Key parts of the organization
Mintzberg defines the key structural parts of the organization via these categories:
- Strategic apex: Senior leaders who set direction and ensure the organization meets external demands.
- Middle line: Managers who translate strategy into operational plans.
- Operating core: Employees who produce goods or deliver services.
- Technostructure: Analysts who design, standardize and measure work processes.
- Support staff: Specialist units that provide internal services (HR, legal, IT).
Mintzberg later added “Ideology” (shared values) as a sixth, culture-shaping element.
2. Coordinating mechanisms
Each structural part usually has its own way of keeping work aligned. This may involve:
- Direct supervision (strategic apex)
- Standardization of work processes (technostructure)
- Standardization of skills (operating core)
- Standardization of outputs (middle line)
- Mutual adjustment (support staff and project teams)
3. Degree of centralization
Organizational design choices range from vertical and horizontal centralization (power concentrated at the top) to various forms of selective or parallel decentralization, distributing authority to specialists, middle managers or autonomous units.
Combining the three dimensions — the key parts, the coordinating mechanisms and the degree of centralization — produces recurring organizational “ideal types,” each dominated by a different part and mechanism:
Organizational Configuration | Key Part | Coordinating Mechanism | Typical Context | Strengths | Vulnerabilities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Entrepreneurial organization | Strategic apex | Direct supervision | Start-ups, owner-managed firms | Agility, clear control | Over-centralization, succession risk |
Machine organization | Technostructure | Standardized processes | Mass production, government agencies | Efficiency, predictability | Rigid, slow to adapt |
Professional organization | Operating core | Standardized skills | Hospitals, universities | Autonomy, expertise | Coordination challenges, professional silos |
Divisionalized organization | Middle line | Standardized outputs | Multibusiness corporations | Accountability, market focus | Duplication, interunit rivalry |
Adhocracy | Support staff/project teams | Mutual adjustment | R&D labs, design firms | Creativity, flexibility | Role ambiguity, high coordination cost |
The right organizational design significantly improves business efficiency by creating clear pathways for communication, decision-making and workflow coordination that eliminate redundancies and bottlenecks. When roles and responsibilities are properly defined and aligned with strategic objectives, employees can focus on their core tasks without confusion or overlap, leading to streamlined processes and faster execution. Well-designed structures reduce unnecessary bureaucracy by placing decision-making authority at appropriate levels, enabling quicker responses to challenges and opportunities.
Additionally, effective organizational design promotes seamless collaboration across departments by breaking down silos and establishing transparent communication channels, which accelerates project completion and enhances overall productivity. In contrast, mixing elements from different configurations without careful fit creates internal tensions and poor performance. Effective organizational designers start with the organization’s environment and strategy, select the configuration that naturally “fits,” and then align structure, systems and culture accordingly.
Mintzberg’s types of organizational structures
Mintzberg suggests companies adopt one of his organizational structures to carry out business operations successfully. However, the type that will work best for your enterprise will likely depend on your industry, how long you’ve been in business, leadership goals and other factors.
Adhocracy
An adhocracy is a flat organization with no formal structure. Instead, highly qualified employees form teams to complete tasks and adjust to industry changes. This is the opposite of a bureaucracy, as organizations that follow this structure have a decentralized process.
An adhocracy employs a large workforce that allows teams to problem-solve quickly, work flexibly and collaborate in innovative ways. A weakness of this kind of innovation organization is that clashes among team members can occur when it’s not clear who is in charge.
Adhocracy characteristics:
- No formal structure
- Employment of experts with varied experience
- No standard procedures
- Undefined roles
- Flexible work
- More collaboration
Machine organization
In a machine organization, workers operate as parts of a standardized system. Each department is responsible for its own tasks, and decision-making is centralized. These departments are incredibly formalized, and specific parameters define employees and their work. In a larger company, these departments could be accounting, marketing, human resources or other standardized teams.
Having clearly defined roles gives workers clarity on their responsibilities. But if these departments differ in workflow and are inconsistent with the business’s goals, conflicts and incompatible work may result.
Machine organization characteristics:
- Standardized work processes
- Centralized decision-making
- Formal departments
- Clearly defined roles
- High degrees of specialization
Professional organization
The professional organization is similarly bureaucratic as the machine organization, but here, each professional works independently without the centralization of tasks that match their specific skill set. This structure places the strengths of organizations on highly knowledgeable workers with particular expertise.
This structure is most commonly found in educational institutions, accounting firms and law firms, where many specialists work for one entity. Because every worker has such unique proficiency, senior management can have difficulty maintaining control and managing them, as these professionals have autonomy.
>> Read Next: What Does It Take to Be a Good People Manager?
Professional organization characteristics:
- Standardized work processes
- Clearly defined roles
- No centralization
- Independent work and decision-making
- High degrees of specialization
Entrepreneurial organization
The entrepreneurial organization consists of a singular structure with one person in power and a few subordinates working beneath them. Compared to other organizational types, this simple structure is informal, as the size of the company gives leaders flexibility.
Most small businesses and startups begin with this structure, where the founder or founders serve as the primary leader for their teams. Many companies experience innovation and success when working in this structure, but too much power at the top can lead to poor decision-making.
Entrepreneurial organization characteristics:
- Singular, simple structure
- Strong leadership, with few senior managers
- Independent decision-making at the top
- Flexible operations
- Little delegation of power
Divisional organization
Large companies with a variety of product offerings and divisions tend to function in a divisional or diversified organization. In this structure, divisions are autonomous and make their own decisions regarding workflow, hiring and other practices. The business’s larger, central team can focus on the overarching company vision since it’s not responsible for day-to-day decision-making.
A downside of the divisional organizational structure is the potential for conflict and competition for company resources between divisions.
Divisional organization characteristics:
- Operating units with autonomy
- Decentralized decision-making
- Singular focus for each team
- More control and accountability for managers
Practical applications of Mintzberg’s theory
Businesses can use Mintzberg’s theory to define their managerial organization and inform roles and responsibilities. Since its initial publishing in the early 1970s, Mintzberg’s theory has influenced generations of companies by helping them instill better decision-making structures, increase self-awareness, build trust with employees and adapt to evolving leadership needs.
“Mintzberg introduced an early view of how leaders are required to fulfill a variety of different roles, depending on the tasks and situations at hand,” Matt Paese, senior vice president of leadership insights at Development Dimensions International, told us.
Starting a business
Because of their size, most small businesses should start out using the entrepreneurial organizational model. Since small businesses are formed when a person or professional partners have an idea for a product or service, all the decision-making should initially come from them. They are the ones who know how the business should operate and how to execute their ideas.
“Small business leaders juggle multiple roles (e.g., manager, innovator, spokesperson) due to limited resources, so these people may benefit from Mintzberg’s emphasis on informal communication and decision-making,” said Catherine Rymsha, management lecturer at the University of Massachusetts Lowell and author of The Leadership Decision.
Scaling a business
As you scale your business, you’ll need to hire a leadership team to share in your growing number of responsibilities because, at a certain point, one or two people managing an entire workforce becomes untenable. Evaluate your business’s workflow to determine how and where your team members are most productive. From there, decide on the organizational structure that works best within your system and can be adopted easily by your current team. Then, appoint people to the managerial roles your company needs.
Adapting to business needs
Internal and external factors will inevitably impact your business over time. Mintzberg’s theory can help you adapt to evolving business needs. For example, small businesses can face quickly changing cycles and challenges, which affect the roles leaders must fulfill.
“At times, leaders may need to emphasize relationships and people leadership (e.g., when staffing up to respond to rapid growth), while other times focusing more on communication and decision-making (e.g., when communicating and implementing a strategic pivot or rapid shift in focus),” said Paese. “Being aware of these different roles, and the critical behaviors that enable effectiveness in each, can help leaders make adjustments to their approaches as business and priorities shift.”
Initially, it may be challenging to transfer control to new team members or change established processes. Allow enough time to be able to honestly assess whether your organizational type, parts and roles are working. You can always reevaluate and adjust your managerial structure as needed.
“Mintzberg’s identified roles can be helpful in segmenting work or even encouraging small business owners to consider what ‘hat’ they want to wear versus delegate,” said Rymsha.
Industry-specific use cases
Mintzberg’s managerial roles and organizational types have applications across industries.
Healthcare
Hospitals and large healthcare clinics benefit from Mintzberg’s professional organization structure, where highly trained clinicians in the operating core rely on standardized skills while administrators in the technostructure create protocols for patient safety. Clear delineation of leader, liaison and disturbance-handler roles helps coordinate care across departments and accelerate response when emergencies disrupt routine workflows.
Manufacturing
High-volume manufacturing plants often resemble Mintzberg’s machine organization, where managers focus on the monitor, resource-allocator and disturbance-handler roles to keep production lines running smoothly. Standardized processes and output metrics clarify accountability, while liaison roles with suppliers and logistics partners reduce supply-chain bottlenecks.
Technology and product development
Software firms and research and development units lean toward an adhocracy that prizes flexibility and innovation. Entrepreneur and spokesperson roles dominate as teams experiment with new features, pivot quickly, and communicate roadmaps to investors and customers. Mutual-adjustment mechanisms replace rigid procedures, enabling cross-functional squads to iterate rapidly.
Professional services
Consulting, law and accounting partnerships fit the professional organization model, where expertise is decentralized to client-facing professionals. The disseminator role is critical for sharing knowledge across engagements, while negotiator and liaison duties help partners secure new business and coordinate multidisciplinary teams.
Retail and multi-brand corporations
As retail chains expand, they often evolve into divisionalized organizations. Middle-line managers act as resource allocators, balancing budgets across stores or brands, while strategic-apex leaders set broad policies. Standardized outputs — such as sales targets or customer-service scores — keep geographically dispersed units aligned without stifling local responsiveness.
Public sector and nonprofits
Government agencies frequently operate as machine organizations, but can adopt adhocratic elements for policy innovation. Nonprofits with lean staffs may begin in a simple structure, relying on the founder’s direct supervision, then transition to a more formalized configuration as programs diversify and funding sources multiply. Across both contexts, figurehead and spokesperson roles are essential for maintaining stakeholder trust and securing resources.
By matching Mintzberg’s configurations and managerial roles to industry realities, organizations gain practical templates for structuring teams, clarifying authority and sustaining efficiency as they grow and evolve.
Alternatives to Mintzberg’s management theory
Mintzberg isn’t the only one who outlined the importance of a proper and clearly defined management structure. Here are some other widely used management theories worth exploring for your business.
Mayo management theory
Elton Mayo’s human relations management theory, based on the Hawthorne experiments, is one of the most foundational management theories still in existence. This theory emphasizes the idea that relational and social factors, as opposed to physical or monetary incentives, drive employee motivation, productivity and engagement. To be successful with this theory, employers and managers should prioritize social elements like communication, group norms, teamwork and employee recognition.
Mayo’s theory argues that a healthy work environment encourages employee retention and productivity.
>> Learn More: The Management Theory of Elton Mayo
Weber management theory
Max Weber’s management theory, also known as the bureaucratic theory of management, emphasizes a formalized structure and hierarchy within organizations. Based on principles of rationality and efficiency, Weber advocated for clear rules, division of labor and impersonal relationships in the workplace. He believed that a well-structured bureaucracy could lead to increased productivity and organizational success, with advancement within an organization determined solely on qualifications and achievements, not personal connections.
Weber’s theory, which is built on a foundation of six characteristics of bureaucracies, highlights the importance of rules, procedures and expertise in achieving organizational goals. His theory offers a systematic approach to management that has influenced modern organizational practices for decades.
>> Learn More: The Management Theory of Max Weber
Follett management theory
Mary Parker Follett’s management theory prioritizes the importance of human relations and the integration of individual and organizational goals. Contrary to a traditional hierarchical approach, Follett used psychology and human relations, as well as her background as a social worker, to advocate for a more collaborative, participative management style.
She believed that conflicts should be directly resolved through integration, that power should be shared among employees and managers, and that managers should focus on coordination and employee engagement. Follett’s theory and principles of coordination laid the foundation for modern management principles, especially among small businesses and employee-centric companies.
>> Learn More: The Management Theory of Mary Parker Follett
Kanter management theory
Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s management theory focuses on structural empowerment and strengthening the organization as a whole rather than building up the individual. Kanter, a Harvard University professor, outlined “six keys” leaders can apply to foster a culture of innovation and creativity where employees are encouraged to take risks and contribute new ideas. The “six keys” are: show up, speak up, look up, team up, never give up and lift up.
Kanter’s theory highlights the need for organizations to adopt a positive culture where employees will perform at the highest level and be more receptive to change.
>> Learn More: The Management Theory of Rosabeth Moss Kanter
Taylor management theory
Frederick Taylor’s management theory, also known as scientific management, emphasizes the systematic study of work processes to improve efficiency and productivity. Taylor advocated for the use of scientific methods to determine the most efficient way of performing tasks, as well as for the standardization of tools and processes to achieve higher levels of productivity.
Taylor’s theory outlined four principles for managers:
- Each aspect of work can (and should) have a science to it.
- Employers should use a scientific approach to selecting, training and developing their employees.
- Employers and employees should collaborate on tasks.
- Employers should divide work and responsibilities among their teams.
Taylor argued that integrating these principles could increase company efficiency and achieve maximum prosperity — for both the business and its employees.
>> Learn More: The Management Theory of Frederick Taylor
FAQs
- Figurehead (ceremonial duties)
- Leader (motivating subordinates)
- Liaison (building external networks)
- Monitor (scanning for information)
- Disseminator (sharing information internally)
- Spokesperson (communicating externally)
- Entrepreneur (initiating change)
- Disturbance Handler (managing crises)
- Resource Allocator (distributing resources)
- Negotiator (representing the organization in negotiations)
Mintzberg's theories remain highly relevant in modern business. Many contemporary companies, especially tech startups and consultancies, work in flexible, project-based ways rather than strict hierarchies. Mintzberg called this an “adhocracy,” where people coordinate directly and adjust quickly as needs change. His ideas about how work gets coordinated — through clear processes, shared skills, set goals or informal collaboration — also explain why matrix structures and cross-functional teams are common today. These setups let experts from different areas solve problems together without waiting on layers of approval.
Mintzberg’s 10 managerial roles give modern leaders a practical checklist of what good managers actually do: connect with people, share and interpret information, and make sound decisions. His organizational structures help companies choose configurations that fit their situation — tight processes for high-volume work, expert autonomy for professional services or flexible teams for innovation — rather than forcing one model everywhere. Most importantly, he teaches leaders to balance trade-offs: keep operations efficient while leaving room for new ideas, and set direction while giving teams enough autonomy to move fast. This balance is exactly what organizations need during digital transformation and rapid market change.
Mintzberg's organizational design is a framework that analyzes how organizations structure themselves to achieve effectiveness by examining three key dimensions: the dominant part of the organization, the primary coordinating mechanism and the type of decentralization used. Rather than treating all organizations as identical, Mintzberg's theory recognizes that different organizations require different structural configurations based on their strategy, environment and internal factors. The framework identifies six basic organizational components: the strategic apex (senior leadership), middle line (middle management), operating core (front-line workers), technostructure (analysts and support specialists), support staff (administrative services) and ideology (organizational culture).
Based on how these elements combine, Mintzberg identified five natural structural configurations: entrepreneurial organization (simple structure with centralized control), machine organization (standardized processes for efficiency), professional organization (skilled specialists with autonomy), divisionalized organization (decentralized units with performance accountability) and adhocracy (flexible project teams for innovation). The key principle is achieving "fit" between an organization's structure and its specific context rather than following generic organizational templates, ensuring that the chosen configuration aligns with the organization's goals and operating environment.
Sammi Caramela contributed to this article.
- P.F. Drucker (Peter Drucker): Modern Management Theory & MBO
- PowerShell: Everything You Need to Know
- How to Hire and Staff for Your Business
- Disaster Recovery Plan for Small Business: A Guide to Disaster Preparedness
- What Is the Triple Bottom Line?
- How Offering Professional Development Opportunities to Employees Helps Your Small Business
