Michael Aiken

Bio: Michael Aiken is an academic researcher from University of Wisconsin-Madison. The author has contributed to research in topics: Alienation & Organizational structure. The author has an hindex of 20, co-authored 34 publications receiving 4977 citations.

Organizational interdependence and intra-organizational structure.

Abstract: The relationship between organizational interdependence was investigated specifically the number of joint programs and internal organizational behavior for health and welfare organizations. A model of organizational interdependence produces 5 hypotheses about organizations which are tested with data for 16 social welfare and health organizations located in a midwestern metropolis in 1967. The hypotheses were: a high degree of complexity varies directly with a high number of joint programs; a high degree of program innovation varies directly with a number of joint programs; a high rate of internal communication varies directly with a high number of joint programs; a high degree of centralization varies inversely with a high number of joint programs; and a high degree of formalization varies inversely with a high number of joint programs. 10 organizations were private; 6 were either public or branches of public agencies. These organizations were all the larger welfare organizations that provide rehabilitiation psychiatric services and services for the mentally retarded. Interviews were conducted with 520 staff members of these 16 organizations. The following were among the study findings: 1) organizations with many joint programs were more complex organizations i.e. they were more highly professionalized and had more diversified occupational structures; 2) organizations with many joint programs were more innovative organizations; 3) organizations with many joint programs had more active internal communication channels; 4) organizations with many joint programs had slightly more decentralized decision making structures; and 5) there was no relationship between formalization and the number of joint programs. A greater degree of complexity was observed i.e. more occupational diversity and greater professionalism of staff in those organizations with the most joint programs. Participation in joint programs is 1 mechanism for adding new occupational specialties to the organization at a reduced cost. With an increase in division of labor organizations become more complex and more innovative. The need for resources to support such innovations promotes interdependent relations with organizations and the greater integration of the organizations in a community structure.

Relationship of centralization to other structural properties.

Abstract: This paper examines two different ways of measuring the distribution of power in sixteen health and welfare orginazations. Participation in decision making about the allocation of organizational resources and the determination of organizational policy was strongly related to the degree of complexity as measured by (1) the number of occupational specialities, (2) the amount of professional training, and (3) the amount of professional activity and was weakly related to the degree of formalization as measured by the degree of job codification and the amount of rule observation. Except for rule observation, hierarchy of authority or the reliance on the chain of command for work decisions was not as strongly related to each of these measures of organizational structure. A partial correlational analysis between each measure of the distribution of power and the five structural properties indicates that participation in decision making retains an association with the first two indicators of complexity and the first indicator of formalization even when the other five variables are controlled simultaneously. The hierarchy of authority retains an association with the amount of professional activity and the amount of rule observation. At the same time, it is important to recognize that these two measures of the distribution of power are themselves strongly interrelated. When decisions about the allocation of organizational resources are centralized, then there is a centralization of work decisions as well. Professors Hage and Aiken are assistant professors of sociology at the University of Wisconsin.

Routine Technology, Social Structure, and Organization Goals

Abstract: This paper investigates the relationship between organizational technology, specifically the degree of routineness of work, and the social structure and goals of health and welfare organizations.! Hypotheses relating four aspects of social structure and two aspects of organizational goals with the degree of routine work are tested with data from sixteen social welfare and health organizations located in a Midwestern metropolis in 1967. The social structure of organizations with more routine work are found to be more centralized, more formalized, and to have less professionally trained staffs, but no relationship with stratification is found. Organizations with routine work are further found to emphasize goals of efficiency and the quantity of clients served, not innovativeness, staff morale, or quality of client services.

Organizational Alienation: A Comparative Analysis

Abstract: The relationship between two types of alienation-alienation from work and alienation from expressive relations-and two structural properties of organizations-centralization and formalization-are examined in a comparative study of sixteen welfare organizations. Both alienation from work and alienation from expressive relations are found to be more prominent in highly centralized and highly formalized organizations. Multivariate analysis is introduced to determine the relative importance of the relationships between measures of centralization and formalization and alienation.

Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony

Abstract: Many formal organizational structures arise as reflections of rationalized institutional rules. The elaboration of such rules in modern states and societies accounts in part for the expansion and i...

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Abstract: Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.

Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences

Abstract: This research addresses three questions: (1) Why are some organizations more market-oriented than others? (2) What effect does a market orientation have on employees and business performance? (3) D...

Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications.

Abstract: The literature reflects remarkably little effort to develop a framework for understanding the implementation of the marketing concept. The authors synthesize extant knowledge on the subject and pro...

Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis Of Effects Of Determinants and Moderators

Abstract: A meta-analysis of the relationships between organizational innovation and 13 of its potential determinants resulted in statistically significant associations for specialization, functional differe...