The Social Psychology of Organizations.

Social Psychology of Organizations

Highlighting an important facet of diversity among organizations operating in different institutional environments, this article presents a model of the growth strategy of the firm in planned economies in transition such as Eastern Europe, the former Soviet republics, and China. Focusing on the stylized state-owned enterprises, we explore the interaction between institutions and organizations in these countries. Given the institutional constraints, neither generic expansion nor acquisitions, two traditional strategies for growth found in the West, are viable for firms in these countries. Instead, firms settle on a network-based strategy of growth, building on personal trust and informal agreements among managers. The institutional environment that leads to this unique strategy of growth is examined, and boundary conditions, limitations, and implications of this model are discussed.

http://innovation-research.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/peng-enterprise-soviet.pdf

The Growth of the Firm in Planned Economies in Transition: Institutions, Organizations, and Strategic Choice

View a collection of videos on Professor Wilson entitled "On the Relation of Science and the Humanities"In his new preface E. O. Wilson reflects on how he came to write this book: how "The Insect Societies" led him to write "Sociobiology," and how the political and religious uproar that engulfed that book persuaded him to write another book that would better explain the relevance of biology to the understanding of human behavior.

On Human Nature

The elements of organizational structuring-which show a curious tendency to appear in five's-suggest a typology of five basic configurations: Simple Structure, Machine Bureaucracy, Professional Bureaucracy, Divisionalized Form, and Adhocracy.

The elements include 1 five basic parts of the organization-the operating core, strategic apex, middle line, technostructure, and support staff; 2 five basic mechanisms of coordination-mutual adjustment, direct supervision, and the standardization of work processes, outputs, and skills; 3 the design parameters-job specialization, behavior formalization, training and indoctrination, unit grouping, unit size, action planning and performance control systems, liaison devices such as integrating managers, teams, task forces, and matrix structure, vertical decentralization delegation to line managers, and horizontal decentralization power sharing by nonmanagers; and 4 the contingency factors-age and size, technical system, environment, and power.

Each of the five configurations relies on one of the five coordinating mechanism and tends to favor one of the five parts. In Simple Structure, the key part is the strategic apex, which coordinates by direct supervision; the structure is minimally elaborated and highly centralized; it is associated with simple, dynamic environments and strong leaders, and tends to be found in smaller, younger organizations or those facing severe crises. The Machine Bureaucracy coordinates primarily by the imposition of work standards from the technostructure; jobs are highly specialized and formalized, units functional and very large at the operating level, power centralized vertically at the strategic apex with limited horizontal decentralization to the technostructure; this structure tends to be found in simple, stable environments, and is often associated with older, larger organizations, sometimes externally controlled, and mass production technical systems. The Professional Bureaucracy relies on the standardization of skills in its operating core for coordination; jobs are highly specialized but minimally formalized, training is extensive and grouping is on a concurrent functional and market basis, with large sized operating units, and decentralization is extensive in both the vertical and horizontal dimensions; this structure is typically found in complex but stable environments, with technical systems that are simple and non-regulating. In the Divisionalized Form, a good deal of power is delegated to market-based units in the middle line limited vertical decentralization, whose efforts are coordinated by the standardization of outputs, through the extensive use of performance control systems; such structures are typically found in very large, mature organizations, above all operating in diversified markets. Adhocracy coordinates primarily by mutual adjustment among all of its parts, calling especially for the collaboration of its support staff; jobs are specialized, involving extensive training but little formalization, units are small and combine functional and market bases in matrix structures, liaison devices are used extensively, and the structure is decentralized selectively in both the vertical and horizontal dimensions; these structures are found in complex, dynamic environments, and are often associated with highly sophisticated and automated technical systems.

In conclusion, it is claimed that the effective Organization will favor some sort of configuration-some type of a logically consistent clustering of its elements-as it searches for harmony in its internal processes and consonance with its environment. But some organizations will inevitably be driven to hybrid structures as they react to contradictory pressures or while they effect a transition from one configuration to another, and here too it is believed that the typology of five can serve as a diagnostic tool in organizational design.

/pdf/structure-in-5-s-a-synthesis-of-the-research-on-organization-2q9bfhvn53.pdf

Structure in 5's: A Synthesis of the Research on Organization Design

The Japanese industrial system

Organization and nation : the Aston programme IV

Purpose – This paper sets out a model of organizational innovation, where leadership and innovation are defined as organizational processes embedded in decision streams in the organization.Design/methodology/approach – The paper reviews the organizational literature on successful and unsuccessful decision processes, placing less on individuals and more on embedded organizational systems that impede quality outcomes.Findings – The paper defines five forces of leadership and innovation that provide a model of decision processes: skills and capabilities, capacity to learn, capacity to listen, capacity to motivate, and innovation.Practical implications – The article provides managers with benchmark tools to assess an organization's decision system, its capacity to learn, and its feedback mechanisms.Originality/value – The paper raises serious questions about traditional bureaucratic hierarchies, conventional models of leadership and innovation, and offers a fresh perspective on quality organizational innovation.

Five competitive forces of effective leadership and innovation

Purpose



– The purpose of this paper is to critique the existing decision-making models of organizational theory and the ability of strategic managers to address unconventional problems using these models. Strategic management models presume reasonable stability in the task environment and the organizational design features. However, complex problems, or wicked problems, are prolific in a global world. They change profoundly the nature of strategic management, where management faces a deep paradox – an environment of unprecedented interdependence, yet unpredictable forces of chaos and volatility, a landscape of wicked problems. In this paper, the authors address wicked problems within the context of strategic management. 




Design/methodology/approach



– The authors review and critique the organizational theory literature, namely, microeconomics, bounded rationality, organizational failure and the theory of creative destruction within the context of wicked problems. 




Findings



– The authors find that the contemporary models of strategic management are incapable of assisting managers in addressing the reality of wicked problems. They argue that organizational pathologies rest in executive action: pursuit of goals and objectives with a false sense of causation, feedback filters that exaggerate good news and restrict bad news and actions that give only token measures to correct faulty design decisions and faulty decision processes, including more emphasis on vertical channels than horizontal task interdependencies. 




Originality/value



– The authors conclude that wicked problem-solving is by temperament and time horizon, a multilayered, multitasked, organizational challenge, and requires fundamentally different mindsets for design and performance systems for senior executives. The study of wicked problems requires a new corporate mindset, new collaborative models to address them and new corporate processes and executive training tools who increasingly have to address them. This research is a first step toward extending our understanding of how to address the world of wicked problems.

Wicked problems: turning strategic management upside down

This is a revised version of a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, August 1974, in Montreal, Canada. The research project on which it is based has been supported by the Canada Council; Columbia University, East Asian Institute; Joint Committee on Japanese Studies of the Social Science Research C ouncil and the American Council of Learned Societies; Management Center, University of Bradford; Research Council, Rutgers University; Swedish Social Science Research Council; and Umea University. Professor Horvath is at Umea University, Sweden; Professor McMillan, at York University, Canada; Professor Azumi, at Rutgers University, USA; and Professor Hickson, at the University of Bradford, England.

Charles J. McMillan

Papers

The Japanese industrial system

Organization and nation : the Aston programme IV

Five competitive forces of effective leadership and innovation

Wicked problems: turning strategic management upside down

The Cultural Context of Organizational Control: An International Comparison