Other access options You may be able to access this content by logging in via your Emerald profile. Rent this content from DeepDyve. Rent from DeepDyve. If you think you should have access to this content, click to contact our support team. Contact us. While members of networks can benefit from enhanced access to resources, sources of legitimacy, and knowledge, they can also miss out on discovering opportunities outside the network.
Interest in networks began with depictions of them as an aspect of context and thus as a determinant of organizational form. There has been considerable interest in these virtual, or network, organizations with Jones, et al. A very different shift in earlyst-century attention is to intraorganizational networks. McEvily, et al. As work in this area has proliferated, so we see how network theory has developed a distinctive language Kilduff and Shipilov Further, explorations of networks have developed to better understand both their structure and formation and their impact on organizations and the people within them.
With respect to the former, Tasselli, et al. An example of the latter is Woehler, et al. Burt, Ronald S. Basic thesis is that networks are opportunity structures for the organizations strategically positioned in them. Not an introductory text. Davis, Gerald F. Illustrates how ideas and practices are carried through networks of common membership of corporate boards of directors.
Compares the predictions of agency theory with interorganizational network theory and finds in favor of the latter. Granovetter, Mark S. Absolute classic. A must-read article for anyone exploring network theory. Points out that strong and weak ties provide different benefits.
Strong ties offer cohesion and high trust. Weak ties typically connect to a wider and more disparate set of sources. Distinguishes between cooperation and coordination. The paper shows that the former has received more attention than the latter, and shows how both are important in the context of interorganizational collaboration.
Jones, Candace, William S. Hesterly, and Stephan P. An influential account of the conditions under which network governance has comparative advantage over integrated organizational forms and thus will emerge and thrive. Draws on transaction theory and social network theory. Kilduff, Martin, and Andrew V. Edited by Martin Kilduff and Andrew Shipilov, xix. Introduction to a four-volume collection of influential contributions by the editors, who provide a nuanced review of the different streams of network research.
Highlights the leading ideas and how they evolved and organizes the main contributions. Revisits the distinction between formal structure within organizations and informal interaction patterns. The paper shows how use of the network approach could reinvigorate this important phenomenon.
Considers three theoretical positions with respect to organizational social networks: that people shape networks, that networks form people, and that people and networks coevolve. Following a review of the literature, the authors conclude that networks and the people that form them can be understood only as mutually constituted, shaped by the organizational contexts within which they are embedded.
Implications for future research are offered. Uzzi, Brian. Definitive analysis of the collective opportunities and competitive benefits arising from an appropriate balance between strong and weak ties in the fashion industry. Woehler, Meredith L. Cullen-Lester, Caitlin M. Porter, and Katherine A.
Suggest that the networks formed by men and women are similar in structure but differ in composition. Critical theory is more commonly found in Europe and Australia than in North America, although it is incorporated into US labor studies see Adler Critical theory essentially questions the assumption of most organizational scholarship that organizations and managers are benign in their aspirations and purposes see Willmott , Fournier and Grey Theorists using this perspective probe the underlying assumptions of managerialism e.
Existing organizational forms are regarded as systems of domination. An early contributor was J. Kenneth Benson see Benson , who suggested that a dialectical approach to organizations is appropriate on the basis of interests, values, and power. The theory confronts and highlights social injustices e. The theory has several disparate strands Alvesson and Deetz Essentially, it points out that organizations should be treated as instruments of political exploitation. Perrow , for example, sees the large, modern corporation as the creation of elite interests that use it to preserve and enhance positions of privilege.
Critical theory is inspired by Karl Marx, not, as are most organization theories, by Max Weber, and the perspective of critical theory reinterprets much organization theory. Critical theory reexamines networks as mechanisms whereby class interests are nurtured and sustained. It treats institutional prescriptions that are taken for granted as hegemonies of ideas serving particular interests e.
Similarly, it regards organizational forms as socially constructed means of generating resources and controlling their unequal distribution. Critical theorists thus question whether organizational forms are in any sense a natural functionalist response to the exigencies of contextual influences, viewing these forms instead as political vehicles. A more modest version of critical theory points not to the hidden hand of elite, class interests but to the unequal distribution of benefits in organizations and the marginalization of certain interests e.
The essential questions of critical theory are who controls organizations and who benefits. Discusses labor process theory and argues that the post-structuralist approach to it takes insufficient account of fundamental Marxist principles. Forbes, and Hugh Willmott. Definitive review of the ideas, motivation, and premises of critical theory. Alvesson, Mats, and Stanley Deetz. Examines the common themes of critical theory and postmodern theory, especially their foregrounding of issues of power.
However, the article is more concerned with highlighting differences between the theories. Benson, J. There are four basic principles to the dialectical view: social construction, totality, contradiction, and praxis. Cooper, David J. An interesting and provocative analysis of institutional theory from the perspective of critical theory.
Contends that the two perspectives are incompatible. Foucault, Michel. Edited by Derek S. Pugh, — Originally published in in Derek S. Pugh, ed. This extract shows how disciplinary processes in armies and prisons were generalized to other types of organizations. Fournier, Valerie, and Chris Grey.
Provides a definition of critical management studies. The authors highlight that this tradition involves denaturalization i. Perrow, Charles. A history of the emergence of large US corporations in the 19th century that traces how their evolution differed from that of counterparts in Europe because of the removal of regulatory constraints.
Claims that the driving force in US history has been the large corporation, to the benefit of those whose interests are aligned with it. Willmott, Hugh. Critically analyzes the literature on organizational and corporate culture. The article pulls out the subjugating implications of the quality movement. Organizational identities influence how organizations make sense of and respond to opportunities and threats arising from their contexts.
Albert and Whetten initially defined organizational identity as the central, enduring, and distinctive beliefs that differentiate the organization from other organizations, yet in the early 21st century there are ongoing debates about the extent to which organizational identities are enduring or can change and be managed an overview of this central debate is provided in Gioia, et al.
Two perspectives permeate this debate. The second emphasizes identity as a sense-making process. This perspective accounts for the necessity for identity to be malleable and adaptive under conditions of change Gioia, et al. These perspectives have been referred to as the social actor and the social constructionist perspectives Corley, et al.
Proponents of the first perspective view organizational identity as a feature or property of the organization as a social actor Corley, et al. A second stream in the literature speaks to the challenge of managing multiple organizational identities and the place of collective identities banks, universities.
Studies suggest that identity plurality in organizations is likely to generate not only tension but also intractable identity conflicts among members who hold conflicting views about what the organization stands for—hence the need to manage this plurality.
Although this literature has mainly examined how organizations handle multiplicity of identities, new insights highlight the likely importance of the pluralistic institutional environment, ascribing collective identities on organizations e.
Interest in organizational identity has grown significantly over the past two decades and has influenced research on a variety of topics for a review, see Pratt, et al. Albert, Stuart, and David A. Edited by Larry L. Cummings and Barry M. Staw, — Here is where it all started. Corley, Kevin G. An examination of a spin-off from a Fortune company and how the new entity developed a new organizational identity.
Looks at the processes that enable identity formation and change. Harquail, Michael G. Pratt, Mary Ann Glynn, C. Marlene Fiol, and Mary Jo Hatch. Not a review but a reflection on two decades of research on organizational identity. The authors argue for a pluralism of approaches. Three questions are in the foreground: 1 What embraces and defines the literature to date? Gioia, Dennis A. Patvardhan, Aimee L. Hamilton, and Kevin G. A comprehensive review of the literature on organizational identity, giving special attention to the debate over whether and how far identities are stable over time.
Gives attention to the smaller body of work on identity formation. Concludes by discussing four prevalent views: social construction, social actors, institutionalist, and population ecologist. Challenges the idea that organizational identity is necessarily enduring. The authors propose that the concept is better conceptualized as more fluid and unstable than originally portrayed in the literature.
Glynn, Mary Ann. This paper reviews thirty-two organizational identity studies in the management literature, notes the small number that have an institutional dimension, and sets out the advantages of better integrating institutional and identity perspectives. Pratt, Michael G. Organizations may have multiple identities. This paper puts forward four major types of managerial strategies for handling multiple identities—compartmentalization, deletion, integration, and aggregation—and makes suggestions concerning the circumstances that affect and define their appropriateness.
Ashforth, and Davide Ravasi, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Identity. New York: Oxford University Press, Ravasi, Davide, and Majken Schultz.
Highlights the role of organizational culture in providing cues supporting sensemaking and sense giving by leaders. Organizational and managerial cognition is concerned with how organization members model reality and how such models influence behavior, especially decision processes.
Two images often characterize decision processes in organization theory Lant , Kaplan One, explicit in structural contingency theory and early versions of the behavioral theory of the firm, is that of the organization as essentially a complex information-processing system: decision making is computational. The second image, running through organizational cognition work since the s, is that of the decision process as interpretative: decision processes involve sensemaking and the social construction of meaning.
The shift here is from seeing the problem purely as one of information processing or conflict resolution to seeing it as one of understanding how managers socially construct their world. There is recognition that organizational processes are shaped by the mental maps and understandings of organizational actors who through their interactions reciprocally reinforce and crystallize those meaning systems.
These cognitive filters not only shape the agenda of issues that receive attention but also frame how they are interpreted Jackson and Dutton and how they are acted on Dutton and Jackson Some work in this tradition has sought to connect the categorization of issues to contextual usually organizational but also temporal circumstances Walsh There is an obvious affinity between cognition research and institutional theorizing of logics, which, it could be argued, are cognitive frames by another name.
Both cognitive and institutional theorists have a strong interest in cognitive categories, and since the late 20th century much attention has been given to how categories arise, their effects on behavior, and of special interest to institutional scholars how they are enforced and change e.
There is also a more psychologically based approach to managerial and organizational cognition cf. Dutton, Jane E. Analyzes how managers interpret issues as threats or opportunities. Basic theme is that managers have a cognitive framework defining the characteristics of threats and opportunities.
Galavan, Robert J. Sund, and Gerard P. Hodgkinson, eds. Bingley, UK: Emerald, A series of essays on methods for studying managerial and organizational cognition from a psychological perspective. Jackson, Susan E. Investigates the issue characteristics that managers associate with the concepts of threat and opportunity and demonstrates that managers are more sensitive to those associated with threats than to those associated with opportunities.
Kaplan, Sarah. Review of cognition studies in strategic management research. Takes Porac, et al. Lant, Theresa K. A useful overview of the cognition literature, focused on two questions: 1 How do organizations obtain information about their environment and its prior performance? Analyzes studies that portray organizations as information-processing entities and those that see them as enactors of their environments. An examination of how managerial cognitive processes are a crucial micro-foundation for understanding how decisions are made, in this case with regard to going international.
The study demonstrates considerable heterogeneity in mental models used. Porac, Joseph F. At the time, Michael E. This paper broke rank by showing that rivalry is a cognitive construction, not something determined by more-objective factors. The environments in which managers compete and how they compete are framed by shared mental models.
Walsh, James P. Reviews empirical and theoretical work up to Analyzes it by level individual, group, organization, industry and by three broad themes: structures of information representation, their development, and their outcomes. The paper concludes that the existence of cognitive structures is clearly established, and calls for research to be redirected toward understanding their outcomes and consequences.
Weick, Karl E. The Social Psychology of Organizing. Topics in Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, One of the most influential texts in organization theory. The text introduces a range of new ways of thinking about organizations—or organizing, as the author insists.
These include the concept of enactment, the suggestion that the purpose of organizing is to reduce equivocality, the idea that sensemaking is a retrospective process, and the distinction between organizing and organization.
Zuckerman, Ezra W. Demonstrates that organizations poorly aligned with cognitive categories of securities analysts receive less attention because of their confusing identity and experience stock price discounts. Zuckerman terms this effect the categorical imperative. Has inspired efforts to understand how categories emerge, their consequences, and how they change. Studies on sense making focus on how actors within and across organizations make sense of events and issues that are ambiguous and surprising e.
Sensemaking is about socially constructed plausible and coherent narratives or accounts Abolofia associated with collective action. These accounts, it has been proposed, may be retrospective i. In organizational settings, sensemaking involves actors from a variety of positions, although senior managers have received emphasis in the research.
Sense giving may also be directed toward audiences outside the organization on which the organization is dependent for its reputation and for social endorsement Abolofia Of particular interest have been sensemaking processes during extreme conditions under which existing interpretative frames collapse see, e. Studies of sensemaking often draw on identity theory e.
A review of these approaches and analysis is found in Maitlis and Christianson Abolofia, Mitchell Y. Balogun, Julia, and Gerry Johnson. This article focuses on the social processes of interaction between middle managers as change recipients as they try to make sense of change interventions. The article demonstrates how lateral, informal processes of interrecipient sensemaking contribute to intended and unintended change outcomes and thus to the unpredictable, emergent nature of strategic change.
Given that the time and attention of senior managers in an organization are limited resources, understanding how issues arise on their attention agenda is important. This article analyzes the very earliest stage in which that occurs; that is, how issues become issues.
Examines how top management teams in higher education made sense of pressures for change. Glynn, Mary-Ann, and Lee Watkiss. Maitlis, Sally. This article highlights the importance of social as well as cognitive processes in organizational sensemaking. Attempts by organizational leaders to provide sense giving are given special notice.
Maitlis, Sally, and Marlys Christianson. Research into sense making has significantly expanded since the turn of the 21st century, and this paper provides a historical overview before focusing on two key themes: how sense making is accomplished, and how sense making affects processes of organizational change, learning on creativity, and innovation.
Maitlis, Sally, and Scott B. A review of Karl E. Also contains a review of the relevant literature and offers suggestions for future directions. This article connects sensemaking to culture and organizational identity through a case study of Amway.
Weber, Klaus, and Mary Ann Glynn. Proposes that there has been an unfortunate neglect of social and historical contexts in sensemaking. The article suggests three mechanisms—priming, editing, and triggering—and evolves the institutional context in sensemaking beyond the idea of internalized logics. Shows not only the criticality of sensemaking structures but also their fragility under conditions of urgency and turbulence.
Sensemaking in Organizations. Foundations for Organizational Science. The study of sensemaking is synonymous with Karl E. Weick, whose empirical studies are foundational papers. This book is an accessible overview of his ideas. Stakeholder theory Freeman ; Freeman, et al. Stakeholders considered in the literature include employees, unions, suppliers, consumers, geographic communities in which the organization operates, and society, but stakeholder theory does not propose that all interests should be treated equally.
The theory asks to which stakeholders management should be attentive, why, and with what consequences. Proponents of stakeholder theory, as indicated in Laplume, et al. It has also been shown that attending to the interests of a range of stakeholders can have positive effects on performance see, e. Arguably, this theory is assertively challenging US forms of capitalism, in which shareholder value is more dominant than in other capitalist nations e.
In line with this, recent research has further considered the implications of this more diverse understanding of stakeholders for organizations see Governance for related discussion of potential consequences in this area. McGahan also considers a fundamental issue that needs to be resolved by theorists if we are to more fully embrace a more diverse stakeholder theory: how to determine which stakeholders have legitimate claims on an organization and which do not, something that McGahan laments was neglected by early stakeholder research.
Barney, Jay B. Thus there is a requirement that a broader stakeholder perspective must be incorporated into the theory. Article discusses some of the empirical and theoretical implications of this. A particular expression of stakeholder theory links it to the management of stigma see Hersel, et al. Freeman, R. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman Series in Business and Public Policy.
Boston: Pitman, Edward, Jeffrey S. Harrison, and Stelios Zyglidpoulos. Stakeholder Theory: Concepts and Strategies. Discusses the concepts of stakeholder management and the advantages this approach provides to firms and their managers. The authors present a number of tools that managers can use to implement stakeholder thinking, better understand stakeholders, and create value with and for them. Frooman, Jeff. Analyzes the kinds of strategies available to stakeholders—withholding, usage, direct, and indirect—and how and why stakeholders might use one or more of them.
Heavily influenced by resource dependence theory. Harrison, Jeffrey S. Barney, R. Edward Freeman, and Robert A. The Cambridge Handbook of Stakeholder Theory. Contains papers arranged into four sections dealing with: theoretical foundations of stakeholder theory, stakeholder theory and society, stakeholder theory in the business disciplines, and stakeholder theory in education and practice. Hernandez, Morela. An exploration of the assumptions of stewardship theory and of its antecedents.
Suggests how feedback loop processes can shift organizational governance away from agency to stewardship. Should be read alongside Margolis and Walsh Margolis, Joshua D.
A review of studies that finds a modestly positive association between socially responsible actions by corporations and their financial performance. McGahan, Anita. Identifying the Boundaries of Stakeholder Claims. Argues that a vital, yet unresolved, issue for stakeholder theory is understanding which stakeholders have legitimate claims on an organization and which do not. Considers the implications for this and suggests some avenues for future research.
Mitchell, Ronald K. A Wall Street stock-trading company, for example, will have a dramatically different work culture than an academic department at a university. Understanding and defining these work cultures and the behavioral implications they embed organizationally is also a central topic in organizational behavior. Organizational theory studies organizations to identify how they solve problems and how they maximize efficiency and productivity.
Organizational theory studies organizations to identify the patterns and structures they use to solve problems, maximize efficiency and productivity, and meet the expectations of stakeholders. Organizational theory then uses these patterns to formulate normative theories of how organizations function best.
Therefore, organizational theory can be used in order to learn the best ways to run an organization or identify organizations that are managed in such a way that they are likely to be successful. This concept map illustrates common internal and external stakeholders: internal stakeholders include employees and managers, while external stakeholders include customers, suppliers, creditors, and society at large. Correctly applying organizational theory can have several benefits for both the organization and society at large.
As many organizations strive to integrate themselves into capitalistic societies, they initiate a ripple effect between other competing firms and already-existing economic pressures. Once an organization sees a window for expansion, it begins to grow by producing more and thus alters the economic equilibrium by catapulting itself forward into a new environment of production. Other firms observe these innovative developments and recreate them efficiently. Developments in organizations help boost economic potential in a society and help generate the tools necessary to fuel its capitalistic system.
One example of how development in an organization affects the modern era is through factory production. Some features of this site may not work without it. Login Register. Author Sirney, Jason M. Advisor Woodbury, Glen L.
Metadata Show full item record. Abstract Emergency management has developed into a profession with demands and expertise separate from other professional disciplines in government service. Coordination issues before, during, and after a disaster have continually been a challenge for emergency management. Although the organizational placement of local government emergency management agencies varies extensively across the United States, public administration organizational theory provides a foundation for considerations that inform the design of these bureaucratic structures.
Structure influences essential emergency management functions such as interagency coordination, resource allocation, program prioritization, decision making, information flow, and collaboration. Organizational design also significantly affects program characteristics, including culture development, professional identity, and employee engagement—all of which have direct relationships with program effectiveness.
0コメント