Arch Coal (NYSE: ACI) is an American coal mining and processing company. The company mines, processes, and markets bituminous and sub-bituminous coal with low sulfur content in the United States. Arch Coal is the second largest supplier of coal in the U.S. behind Peabody Energy. [3] The company supplies 16% of the domestic market. [4] Demand comes mainly from generators of electricity.[5]

Arch Coal operates 21 active mines and controls approximately 3.1 billion tons of proven and probable coal reserves, located in Central Appalachia, the Powder River Basin, and the Western Bituminous regions.[6] The company operates mines in Colorado, Kentucky, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming, and is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri.[7] The company sells a substantial amount of its coal to producers of electric power, steel producers and industrial facilities



I certify that my modifications are exact
Confirm Cancel
3
CEO
Steven Leer
Director
Thomas Lockhart
Director
Patricia Godley
2
Director
Wesley Taylor
Director
Brian Jennings
6
Director
Robert Potter
2
Director
Theodore Sands
7
Director
Thomas Jones
Director
Peter Wold
Director
Douglas Hunt
8
Director
Michael Perry
3
Lead Director
James Boyd
CFO
John Drexler
2
COO
John Eaves
Operations
PL
Strategic Development
HB
2
CIO
David Hartley
7
Legal & Secretary
Robert Jones
Development
DP
Human Resources
SF
Marketing & Trading
DW
Control
GS
Internal Audit
CW
2
Eastern Operations
Robert Shanks
Treasurer
JF
Accounting
JL
Investor Relations & Public ...
DS
Safety
AB
2
Tax
David Steele

Organizational structure refers to the way that an organization arranges people and jobs so that its work can be performed and its goals can be met. When a work group is very small and face-to-face communication is frequent, formal structure may be unnecessary, but in a larger organization decisions have to be made about the delegation of various tasks. Thus, procedures are established that assign responsibilities for various functions. It is these decisions that determine the organizational structure.

In an organization of any size or complexity, employees' responsibilities typically are defined by what they do, who they report to, and for managers, who reports to them. Over time these definitions are assigned to positions in the organization rather than to specific individuals. The relationships among these positions are illustrated graphically in an organizational chart (see Figures 1a and 1b). The best organizational structure for any organization depends on many factors including the work it does; its size in terms of employees, revenue, and the geographic dispersion of its facilities; and the range of its businesses (the degree to which it is diversified across markets).

There are multiple structural variations that organizations can take on, but there are a few basic principles that apply and a small number of common patterns. The following sections explain these patterns and provide the historical context from which some of them arose. The first section addresses organizational structure in the twentieth century. The second section provides additional details of traditional, vertically-arranged organizational structures. This is followed by descriptions of several alternate organizational structures including those arranged by product, function, and geographical or product markets. Next is a discussion of combination structures, or matrix organizations. The discussion concludes by addressing emerging and potential future organizational structures.



Understanding the historical context from which some of today's organizational structures have developed helps to explain why some structures are the way they are. For instance, why are the old, but still operational steel mills such as U.S. Steel and Bethlehem Steel structured using vertical hierarchies? Why are newer steel mini-mills such as Chaparral Steel structured more horizontally, capitalizing on the innovativeness of their employees? Part of the reason, as this section discusses, is that organizational structure has a certain inertia—the idea borrowed from physics and chemistry that something in motion tends to continue on that same path. Changing an organization's structure is a daunting managerial task, and the immensity of such a project is at least partly responsible for why organizational structures change infrequently.

At the beginning of the twentieth century the United States business sector was thriving. Industry was shifting from job-shop manufacturing to mass production, and thinkers like Frederick Taylor in the United States and Henri Fayol in France studied the new systems and developed principles to determine how to structure organizations for the greatest efficiency and productivity, which in their view was very much like a machine. Even before this, German sociologist and engineer Max Weber had concluded that when societies embrace capitalism, bureaucracy is the inevitable result. Yet, because his writings were not translated into English until 1949, Weber's work had little influence on American management practice until the middle of the twentieth century.

Management thought during this period was influenced by Weber's ideas of bureaucracy, where power is ascribed to positions rather than to the individuals holding those positions. It also was influenced by Taylor's scientific management, or the "one best way" to accomplish a task using scientifically-determined studies of time and motion. Also influential were Fayol's ideas of invoking unity within the chain-of-command, authority, discipline, task specialization, and other aspects of organizational power and job separation. This created the context for vertically-structured organizations characterized by distinct job classifications and top-down authority structures, or what became known as the traditional or classical organizational structure.
 
Top