Abstract Organization theory and structure have gained tremendous attention in the past two decades as world changes forced management gurus to find out what kind of organizational structure was required to extract maximum productivity. Social, political and cultural changes have contributed towards formulation of better organizationaltheories. While each theory claimed to possess a new meaning, they were all based on similar ideas and thus twenty years hence, they would all come to be labeled as postmodern or post-industrial organizationaltheories. These theories have helped in identifying the factors, which are leading to change, in organizations.
Abstract This paper examines the general theory of crime set forth by Michael R. Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi. The paper delineates what the theory is and then presents a critique of it using the Social Organizationaltheory. In the final analysis, the paper concludes that Social Organizationaltheory offers a fairly trenchant rebuttal of some of the careless assumptions made in Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime."
From the Paper "Any critical evaluation of criminal theory is fraught with difficulty insofar as no one explanation satisfactorily explains all of the various reasons why human beings engage in illicit behavior. Be that as it may, the Social Organizational theory comes closer than most to elucidating why human beings often act in the manner they do and it provides a constructive critique of the general theory of crime put forward by respected academics like Gottfredson and Hirschi. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: firstly, the paper will briefly outline what is meant by the "General Theory of Crime" as it most commonly understood. Secondly, the paper will evaluate this theory using the Social Organizational theory that has gained such popularity in recent years."
Abstract This paper examines organizationaltheory regarding in-groups and out-groups and how this theory is critical in today's business environment because of the emphasis on teams and team formation. The paper explains that in-groups and out-groups are important for organizational leaders to understand and comprehend at risk of allowing an organization to fall into disarray and inefficiency. The paper also discusses how the differences between these two types of groups within the organization are stark - one group can be characterized by its inclusion and its sense of accomplishment and trust while the other can be characterized by its marginality and its lack of inclusiveness in any decision-making processes. The paper also points out that the effect of these two types of groups on any given organization is almost always negative but sometimes their full impact is not noticed until long after they form. In conclusion, the paper shows that leaders and managers need to be aware of these groups and ensure that no employees are isolated or excluded from the requisite inclusion within the business and organizational processes of the organization itself.
Outline:
Overview
In-Group Experience
Out-Group Experience
Differences
Effect of These Groups Membership & Performance
Leadership Factors
From the Paper "Often, membership in these groups is not necessarily related to task or task performance. While an individual completely botching a task might potentially land them in the out-group, generally these groups form based on inter-personal reasons and relationships with various other co-workers and with management (Harris 142). As previously mentioned, group formation is not necessarily a bad thing to happen in the context of an organization. The danger is that such groups, if not properly managed, can lead to ostracizing and isolating valuable employees and even fellow team members."
Abstract The paper relates that contemporary organizationaltheories have shifted the focus of control from the organizational structure itself to the value and contribution of the individual. The paper explains this to mean that today's theories have changed from being essentially hierarchical, rigid and lacking agility. The paper shows how theories today take a more integrated approach to responding to customers and the broader market influences.
Outline:
Introduction
OrganizationalTheories' Evolutionary Pattern of Growth
The Future of OrganizationalTheories' Evolution
Conclusion
From the Paper "In analyzing how contemporary organization theories are a product of an evolutionary process, the progression of theories can't be viewed in isolation, they must be seen as influenced by the broader demographic, economic, sociological and more immediate knowledge management and managerial trends within organizations. The progression of top-down organizational structures that were heavily influenced by both the military chain-of-command concepts (Mutch, pp. 751 - 769) and the bureaucratic approach to management have dramatically changed as organizational theories have transitioned over the last century. From theories that were centered purely on the creation of closed-loop systems that had as their catalyst military chains of command to the more contemporary theories today that stress agility and responsiveness, organizational theories have gone through significant change over the last century."
Abstract The paper explains that, in the history of organizationaltheory, few eras have been as significant on the shape of organizational management as the classical theories developed around the turn of the twentieth century. This essay examines the work that these two accomplished, specifically referring to Weber's "Bureaucracy" and Taylor's "The Principles of Scientific Management" and discuss why each theorist was so important to the development of early organizationaltheory. "
From the Paper "In the history or organizational theory, few eras have been as significant on the shape of organizational management as the classical theories developed around the turn of the twentieth century. The theories developed in those early decades of the Industrial Revolution dominated organizational management throughout the course of the twentieth century. Theorists such as Max Weber and Frederick Taylor had a major impact on our understanding of how organizations are structured as well as how they can be mad more efficient. Unfortunately, perhaps the unintended consequence of this efficiency, as Weber and Taylor outlined it, was a severely dehumanized workplace. This essay will examine the work that these two accomplished - specifically referring to Weber's "Bureaucracy" and Taylor's The Principles of Scientific Management - and discuss why each theorist was so important to the development of early organizational theory."
Abstract Provides an analysis of the subject matter, underlying assumptions, and contributions to the field of organizationaltheory. The paper looks at the history of organizationaltheory and development. It also covers the human cost of work and organizational behavior.
From the Paper "Analysis and Synthesis of
Industrial Era Organization Theory
Introduction
This analysis will utilize three seminal books in the field of organizational theory - Classics of Organization Theory, by Jay M. Shafritz and J.Steven Ott; Complex Organization..."
Abstract The paper summarizes an article by Wendy Wheeler that discusses the emerging organizationaltheory and the youth development organization. The paper shows how Wendy Wheeler points out that profound changes in the world, including changes pertaining to society, technology and globalization, have led to changes in organizationaltheories. The paper explains that of particular note is the move towards flatter organizational structures, rather than hierarchical.
Abstract In recent decades, the organization of businesses has evolved, and with it the theory relating to organizational structure has evolved. Bearing in mind this evolution, the author of this paper formulated a metaphor for organization theory that she believes is relevant to current organizationaltheory. The metaphor chosen is the brain. This metaphor is informed by the latest research on the functioning of the brain.
Abstract This paper acknowledges how Robert B. Denhardt, professor of public administration at Arizona State University, has authored numerous works on the topic of human behavior as it relates to public organization. In particular, it examines how he draws heavily on the ideas of Weber, Marx and Freud to illustrate just how the governing theories and scholarly assumptions concerning organizationaltheory have developed into the modern version of the theory.
From the Paper "Of course, one of the most influential thinkers on organizational theory was Max Weber. According to Weber, the "organization" or the "bureaucratic administration" is a symbol of the exertion of control based on knowledge. What was interesting about his work, however was his distinction between the idea of "power" and "authority"-where actual authority is distinguished by a belief in the "legitimacy" of the exercise of power (as apposed to despotism, for example). Further, another hallmark of his work was his classification of organizational power based on the type of legitimacy granted by those governed by that power."
Abstract The paper discusses corporate social responsibility and 19 organizationaltheory articles in a 25 page paper synthesizing theory with practice. The paper argues that many companies now recognize that they have responsibilities not only to their shareholders, but also to other interested communities.
From the Paper "Traditionally managers are responsible to a company's board of directors and the board of directors is responsible to the shareholders. This has resulted in a bias among managers toward returning value to shareholders to the exclusion or at least detriment of others who have an interest in a company's performance."
Tags: corporate social responsibility, organizationaltheory
Abstract This paper provides a definition of an organization, organizationaltheory, and its use in management. A discussion of open and closed systems, bureaucracy and the advantages and disadvantages of rules and regulations within an organization.
From the Paper "What is an organization? An organization is a socially structured and coordinated system which is composed of two or more people with the aim of achieving a common goal, or mission. The individuals who collectively constitute the organization are directed, by managers, towards achieving their shared goal within sub-systems and boundaries which serve to separate the organization's internal environment from the external environment with which it interacts."
Abstract This paper discusses the differences between innovation and imitation in entrepreneurship. It specifically looks at these concepts in the light of organizationaltheory. The paper concludes that both imitation and innovation are ways by which knowledge can be diffused within the organization or, often in the present, between different organizations.
From the Paper "Indeed, the knowledge exchange between peers can virtually go both ways at any given time. If we take, for example, a start-up software producing company, most of the individuals employed in this organization will be software developers. Between them, we are likely to have two different types of characters. We will have the innovators, those who study new approaches, find new solutions and implement them in their day-to-day work (although at some point they can also be imitators, drawing on the ideas from books etc. although here we need to make a distinction between learners and imitators), and we will have the imitators, who will base their work in the company on the knowledge that the former diffuse within the organization."
Abstract This paper discusses a 2004 article, "Falling morale hurts Guard Retention" by N.R. Helms, on retention in the U.S. Army in relation to organizationaltheory and models. The issue of the public response to the U.S. military in the post-9/11 world and war in Iraq is discussed.
From the Paper "The purpose of this essay is to examine a specific article depicting an organizational issue in the context of organizational theory and models leading to recommendations as to how the organization should ..."
Abstract This paper discusses various organizationaltheories as they apply to companies in the private sector, the public sector and the non-profit sector. It includes classical theories in organization as well as more modern approaches to organizationaltheory. The paper also looks at the consequences of globalization on the development of an organization.
From the Paper "Based on a study that explored the racial awareness of white union members partaking in the grocery workers' strike in Southern California, gathered information was used through thorough interviews and participant examination, the gender-specific racialization of customers and scabs as articulated by white union members by means of a series of thorough interviews and participant examination was documented. The study revealed the numerous ways white preeminence and white racial solidarity are maintained and created in a multiracial labor effort.The split labor market theory has been utilized to explain the fundamental causes behind racialized labor and the separation among working classes all along racial lines. The central assumption is that racial antagonism initially germinated in a labor market split down ethnic lines. In a split labor market, the prevailing racial or ethnic group develops a racial social group system that limits lower-cost labor of color to lower-status and lower-paying jobs, thus undermining multiracial class camaraderie. This affects the level of solidarity across racial lines and frequently reinforces divisions amongst workers. In other words, split labor markets can help in producing or maintaining racism and racial opportunity in conjunction with other forms of disparity, such as sexism and patriarchy (Semenik, 1995).However, white workers still passed racial divisions in spite of standing alongside with workers of color. By separated, it does not refer to physical barriers, but more so down the lines of where racial unity is conveyed. People of color are discerned as such by white workers, whereas white workers themselves stay ethnically unmarked, or without race. This serves the two to reinforce the power of the capitalist group while at the same time weakening the supremacy of the working class. In other words, this progression produces apprehension among workers and averts tension ahead of capital."
Abstract This essay describes symbolic convergence theory, postulated by Ernest Bormann and used in group (especially small group) interaction and activity. The paper points out that, quite often in the business, political or social world several individuals with different backgrounds, aptitudes and preferences are asked to work together in a group. The theory addresses these kinds of situations. The paper concludes that the theory is somewhat too simple and limited to be anything else than an intuitive observation, with no potential for development and no real essential reflection on communication or group work.
From the Paper "An important characteristic of the fantasy that needs to be shared with the group is that it needs to belong outside the group and, in this sense, outside the idea that is shared or discussed with the group. The respective fantasy shared by one of the individuals is supposed to be able to trigger a similar reaction from the other members of the group and increase cohesion. As such, someone else from the group might remember that it's also the birthday of a member of his own family and he will share this with the group. This creates a symbolic convergence that will help increase the convergence of the group and helps "build a sense of community or a group consciousness" (Young, 1998; from Griffin, 1997)."
