英语翻译To clarify the various ways firms are typically organize

英语翻译
To clarify the various ways firms are typically organized,consider the following hypothetical example.ABC Company produces and sells two versions of a product in two countries,Norway and the United States.Each version of the product requires occasional country-specific design adaptations,and,of course,each version must be marketed in each country.There are thus four basic tasks,design and marketing for each version of the product.These four activities may be organized into one of four commonly observed structures,depicted in Figures 1-4.In Figure 1,the structure is flat with the manager in charge of each activity reporting directly to the CEO; an example is Nucor (Ghemawat 1995).Figure 2 depicts a divisional hierarchy in which there are two midlevel managers,each coordinating the two functions for a given country (product).In Figure 3,the hierarchy is organize along functional lines; i.e.,each of the two middle managers is in charge of a function for both countries (products).Finally,Figure 4 shows a matrix organization in which each bottom-level manager reports to two middle managers; e.g.,the marketing manager for Norway reports both to the middle manager in charge of Norway and the middle manager in charge of global marketing.
An interesting topic in the theory of the firm,relatively under explored in the economics literature,is what determines whether an organization adopts a matrix or hierarchical structure,how many levels are involved,and how activities are grouped.Several authors in the organization behavior literature have argued that the choice between divisional and functional structures is driven by the relative importance of coordination of functional activities within
a product line and economies of scale from combining similar functions across product lines (see Jennergren 1981 for a survey).The advantage of a divisional structure is that it allows better coordination among the various functions,such as manufacturing,product design,personnel,and marketing,required to produce and sell a product.Segregating these functions by product divisions,however,results in the failure to exploit economies of scale available if,for example,marketing for all products is handled by a central marketing department.Trading off these advantages,it is argued,determines whether one adopts a divisional or a functional hierarchy.

为了澄清各种方式的公司通常是有组织的,请考虑以下假设的例子.ABC公司生产和销售两个版本的产品在两个国家中,挪威和美国.每个版本的产品需要不定期国家的具体设计的修改,当然,每一个版本,必须在每一个国家销售.有四项基本任务,因此,设计和营销的每个版本的产品.这四项活动,可以组织成四个常见的结构,描述了数字1-4 .图1中的结构是平坦的经理负责的每一项活动,直接向首席执行官;一个例子是纽柯（盖莫沃特1995年） .图2描述了分区等级,其中有两个中层管理人员,每个协调这两项职能对某一国家（产品） .最后,图4显示的矩阵组织,每个底部级别经理报告两个中层管理人员;例如,营销经理都挪威报告的中层管理人员,负责挪威和中层管理人员,负责全球市场营销.一个有趣的话题的企业理论,探讨了相对落后的经济学文献,是判断一个组织采用矩阵或等级结构,有多少参与程度,以及如何进行分组活动.一些作者在组织行为文学主张,选择分区和功能结构的动力是相对重要性的协调功能活动
产品线和规模经济类似的职能相结合的产品线（见Jennergren 1981年的一项调查显示） .的优点分区结构是,它允许更好地协调各职能,如制造,产品设计,人员,市场营销,要求生产和销售产品.这些职能分开的产品部门,然而,结果未能利用规模经济可举例来说,如果销售的所有产品是由一个中心市场部.此消彼长的这些优势,有人认为,决定是否采用了一个分区或一个功能等级.