• Frank Safayeni CPH 4352, fsafayeni@uwaterloo.ca
• TAs
  • Richard Clayton rcclayto@engmail.uwaterloo.ca
  • Chris Poile CPH 4357 cpoile@engmail.uwaterloo.ca
  • Golnaz Tajeddin CPH 4334 gtajeddi@engmail.uwaterloo.ca
• Organization Theory: A Strategic Approach, Sixth Edition, By Hodge, Anthony, and Gales

marks

• quizzes: 35% (5.833% each)
• tutorials: 25% (5% each)
• final: 40%

• orgs
  • categories (high tech, non-profit)=lame
  • lame organization definition: based on a set of formal and informal constraints with the resulting patterns of behavior
• constraint: something that reduces the set of possible outcomes
• rule: decision in advance

methods

• classical (Scientific Management)
  • problems: limited application, optimization may have undesirable consequences
  • unit of analysis: steps in performing simple physical task
• bureaucracy: designed to be machine-like, do everything according to rules/procedures/etc
  • probs: rule appropriateness, difficulty in changing them, hierarchical communication/decision
  • unit of analysis: offices and procedures
• human relations
  • probs: organizations != sum of people; job satisfaction is correlated with productivity
  • unit of analysis: individual and small group behaviour
• systems approach
  • unit of analysis: cycle of events
  • probs: selecting appropriate level of analysis; from abstract concepts to specific cycle of events; complexity of application
• modern approach (Contingency theory): structure = f(internal,external)
  • organizational economics, institutional theory, cultural perspective, ecological perspective

• structure (work division & coordination) vs design (structure + process (e.g. unit grouping formalization, planning, etc.)) but often used interchangeably
• intended vs emergent is a better grouping
• formal org chart (communication, decisions, authority, responsibility) vs informal (communicatio network, decisions rubber-stamped, distributed authority eg via knowledge)
• differentation: horizontal, vertical, spacial
• division of labour (specialization)
  • good: experts, low training, less dependence on labour
  • bad: coordination ("management's biggest headache"), worker alienation
    • attemps to involve workers: job rotation, job enlargement (don't work), job enrichment (=decision-making, works)
• integration (coordinating mechanisms); coordination=communication+capacity+cooperation
  • 5 types in sorta decreasing desirability: standardization of work, output, skill; direct supervision (DS), mutual adjustment (MA)
  • non-structural means: liaison roles, teams (self organizing), culture (expectations)
• centralized good (few decision points, mgmt control, consistency), bad (info overload, inflexible, conflict with experts)
• span of control: the number people to be supervised, hierarchy (flat vs tall, not hierarchy growth)
• mechanistic vs organic
  • coordination: standardixation vs mutual adjustment
  • decisions: centralized + rigid vs decentralized + flexible
  • work division: well-defined and narrow vs ill-defined and wide
  • authority & responsibility: well-defined vs not
  • social structure: weak vs strong
• dysfunctional consequences of bureaucracy or mechanistic structures: Merton’s model (rigidity, means-ends inversion, worker apathy)
• survey: bosses think they understand 80-90% of what their employees do, but employees think their bosses only get 10-20%

• good theory has rigour, operational definition, generality, parsimony (sorta stinginess)
• hypothesis: theory-based research question expressed as prediction
• hypothesis testing: real world or experimental
• good method: reliability, validity (4 parts)
  • face (appears valid)
  • construct (measures the right thing)
  • internal (rules out alternative explanations)
  • external
• research methods
  • case study: prob is lack of rigour
  • field study (eg questionaire): large sample; prob is questionaire's assumptions
  • experiment: prob is generalizing to real world; pseudo-experiments in the field
• simulation studies
  • modelling real world: prob is too many untested assumptions
  • training: prob is (dis)similarity to real world
• don't trust methodology: how did measure/analyze? how do know method is good? does conclusion go beyond findings?

goals

• objective/goal: desirable state in the future
• official vs operative
• act as constraint, provide direction, reduce uncertainty, etc
• standards for evaluation
• motivation
• makes orgs legitimate
• hierarchical goals vs coalitions/bargaiing/side payemtns/organizational slack
• goal conflict (individual vs org., department vs department)
• goal displacement: success, then what?
• means-ends inversion
• overmeasurement: eg measuring becomes part of the goal (employment agency), quantitative affecting qualitative (manulife), info generation (british police)

effectivness

• effective vs efficient
• goal model probs: multiple goals, definitions (fire dpt effectiveness), short vs long-term
• models: system resource, internal process

• book "in search of excellence": biase towards action, customer proximity, sticking to knitting, simple/lean, autonomy/entrepreneurship, productivity through people, hands-on & value-driven, simulaneious lose-tight properties, org. culture
• books etc probs: overgeneralization, data collection process, facts vs speculation, difficulty in chaning orgs, language games

• uncertainty: environmental complexity & dynamism, munificence (resource availability)

• mechanistic for low uncertainty, organic for high uncertainty
• more uncertainty leads to structural differentiation; effectiveness requires integration
• contingency theory: optimum org structure function of environment and uncertainty
• internal actions
  • environment scanning: amount/interpretation of info (CIA), org actions (IBM inventory)
  • info systems
  • planning/forecasting, buffering, smoothing, rationing
  • creating self-contained units
  • copying others

• dynamic system: stable output via negative feedback
• ashby's law: Variety in outcome>=variety of D/variety of R (or, only variety can destroy variety)
• variety: number of states & their probabilities; sources: internal, external
• variety reduction: constraints, filters, input grouping, elimination at source

• network stuff: wheel vs circle
• extra variety handling = inefficient

technology

• tech: input --knowledge/tools/behaviour--> output
• insurance agency: caused centralization
• Woodward: unit (complex enviro), mass (mechanistic), continuous processes (complex tech) productions, 1&3 use organic
• employee skill: variety-handler; leads to decentralization
• Computer Integrated Manufacturing: low v-handling so workarounds
• robotic arm story
• Perrow TABLE
• Thompson task connection: mediated/pooled interdependence (banks), sequential (assembly line), reciprocal (prod. devel.)
• routineness: _ centralization, _ formalization, _ specialization
• specialization: proportional to production, 1/p to satisfaction
• socio-technical: eg coal miners in groups no more
• future: no roles/tasks=flatter org, virtual=issues, democraticness

org lifecycle

• how size measured?
• growth: security, power/prestige
• systems model: 1 primitive 2 stable 3 elaborate (boundary, adaptive, mgmt struct)
• Lippit-Schmidt: birth (risk), youth (how to organize), mature (how to change)
• Greiner: growth creativity -leadership> direction -autonomy> delegation -lack of control> improved control -red tape> team -stagnation> org. change/develop
• decline due to:external (decl. market, resource scarcity, new tech, i18n) internal (atrophy, vulnerability, lose legitimacy)
• decline causes: conflict (org, person), stress, political action, resistance, turnover/layoffs, less motivation

• structure:
  • functional: based on similarity; good for SME, stable environments, top management wanting control; low variety-handling
    • pro: skill/specialization, economics of scale, top mgmt control, work environment; con: slow, communication, overloading centralized decision-making, general managers
  • product: good for unstable/uncertain enviros, bigcos, many products; better variety handling via reducing internal var., better communication
    • pro: adapts, communication, good mgmt training, top mgmt can handle strategy; con: resource duplication, lack of specialization, implementing org-wide stuff, divisional rivalry
  • matrix: good for high enviro uncertainty; more variety-handling via regrouping/allocation
    • pro: availability of skill/resources, flexible, innovation, home base for specialists; con: 2 bosses, conflict, team enviro, unstable enviro, admin/communication cost
• structure & strategy influence each other
• emergent structure

• culture: shared values/beliefs/behaviour/expectations; poor behaviour predictor
• levels of analysis: og, behaviour setting, task-related social struct
• ideal vs reality
• indicators: stories, ceremonies, language, physical enviro
• indoctrination

• echo technique: uses specific examples of good/bad behaviour

• decision: reduction of uncertainty; rule-based (programmed) vs non (intuitive)
• dec-making steps: perceiving gap, defining prob, diagnose, alternatives, evaluate, choose, implement
• simplify via categorization
• actually small sample size, availability & representativeness bias
• satisficing: good enough (not optimum)
• incremental decision-making
• garbage can model: anarchy, as probs/solutions/choice opportunities/participants/ all independent