What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

С возрастанием внимания к планированию национальных информационных ресурсов, расширением потребностей бизнеса и государства возникает необходимость в лучшем понимании новых методов стоимостной оценки информационных ресурсов со стороны руководителей, исследователей и практиков. Статья преследует следующие цели: выявление необходимости оценивания интеллектуального капитала на макроэкономическом уровне; пересмотр методологии оценивания интеллектуального капитала в масштабах одного государства; предложение методов оценивания и потребных областей их продвижения; выявление недостатков в существующих методах оценивания и формирование на этой основе направлений дальнейших исследований.

Knowledge Assets in the Global Economy: Assessment of National Intellectual Capital, Journal of Global Information Management, July-Sep, 2000, 8(3), 5-15./ Интеллектуальные активы в глобальной экономике: оценивание национальных интеллектуальных ресурсов

Organizational Growth and Development

This brief essay by the founder of scientific management has served for nearly a century as a primer for administrators and for students of managerial techniques. Although scientific management was developed primarily as a system for increasing productivity in industry, its principles have been applied to all kinds of large-scale enterprises, including operations with departments and agencies of the federal government. It is in this volume that Frederick Winslow Taylor gave the theory of scientific management its clearest airing. Born in 1856, Taylor began work at age eighteen as an apprentice to a pattern-maker and as a machinist. A few years later he joined the Midvale Steel Company as a laborer, and in eight years rose to chief engineer. During this time he developed and tested what he called the "task system," which became known as the Taylor System and eventually as scientific management. He made careful experiments to determine the best way of performing each operation and the amount of time it required, analyzing the materials, tools, and work sequence, and establishing a clear division of labor between management and workers. His experiments laid the groundwork for the principles that are expounded in this essay, which was first published in 1911.

The principles for scientific management

The legal context

/pdf/management-dynamics-in-the-knowledge-economy-1rlab0ywfn.pdf

Stefano Amelio

Papers

Management dynamics in the knowledge economy