Li805 Organization Theory

Organization Theory Running head: ORGANIZATIONS AND ORGANIZATION THEORY

Organizations as Living Entities

Monique Lloyd Emporia State University

1

Organization Theory

2

Organizations are living entities. This is what I came away with after reading Hatch’s text (Hatch, 1997) as well as numerous articles on organization theory. An organization can be simply defined as a group of individuals working together toward common goals. We are all part of organizations from the time we are born into a family to the time we are buried. Organization theory gives us tools to examine the concepts and relationships of the systems composing the organization and this examination can help us reach our goals in more efficient ways. Continuing the analogy of an organization as a living thing, one could say that an organization is born, grows, matures, and eventually dies. It can be merged into a family. It has a brain (managers), guts (risk taking), and heart (social responsibility). It has muscles (power and movement), nerves (responds to external forces), has a skeleton (systems), and social, cultural, and political facets. It uses technology, has life blood (raw goods), waste, eyes (vision), hands (a work force), a voice and an ego (marketing). It changes and adapts to its environment (Kirk, 2004) and has social networks (Cross, Borgatti, and Parker, 2002). It is self-reflective, periodically taking assessments of itself and making adjustments as needed. If it is truly fortunate, it has spirit, a true leader (Moran, 1995). An organization can work together with others (vertical and horizontal integration) or compete (Hatch, p.78). It can learn to speak another language

Organization Theory

3

while keeping its own accent (Heyman, 2001). It can educate itself (Vedder, Vanecek, Gunynes, & Cappel, 1999), develop core values (Patkus & Rapple, 2000), and find ways to communicate with others such as with communities of creation (Sawhney & Prandelli, 2000), communities of practice (Wenger & Synder, 2000), and strategic communities (Storck & Hill, 2000). An organization can become burned out because of the “incessant demand for and adpation” (Victor & Stephens, 1994) and even end up having a breakdown (Holt, 2004). Sometimes the rush to a cure makes things worse (Christensen & Raynor). An organization can develop communication problems (Schein, 1996) or serious memory problems because of employee turnover (Cross & Baird). The analogy is admittedly limiting and fits well with the postmodernism view only if one looks at organizations as living entities as drawn by Picasso in which parts are constantly being cut out and rearranged differently, adding “contradiction, ambiguity, and paradox” as well as makingmanagers artists creating “the organization in their hearts and minds as a theory” (Hatch, p.55). I like the analogy of organizations as living entities because both are complex, composed of interconnected systems, are self-defined but shaped by their culture and environment. They have both form and function, are always changing, and influence and are influenced by others. Most of all organizations have similarities yet each is unique and attempting to find its niche

in the world

Organization Theory

4

Christensen, C.M. & Raynor, M.E. (2003). Why hard-nosed executives should care about management theory. Harvard Business Review, 81, (9), 66-74 Cross, R. & Baird, L. (2000). Technology is not improving performance by building organizational memory. Sloan Management Review 41 (3), 41-54. Hatch, M.J. (1997). Organization theory: Modern symbolic and postmodern perspectives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Heyman, M.K. (2001). Building successful relationships with IT professionals. Information Outlook, 5 (4), 34-42. Holt, G.E. (2004). Economics: simple basics: little things that make us look stupid. The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances, 17 (4), 147-149. Kirk, T.G. (2004). The role of management theory in day-to-day management practices of a college library director. Library Administration & Management, 17 (4), 35038. Moran, B.B.(1995) Learning about Leadership: What Works in Modern Organizations in

Allen, B.L. and Weece, T. L. (eds), Critical Issues in Library Management: Papers from the Thirty-Fifth Allerton Institute, University of Illinois, GLIS, Urbana-Champaign, 1995, pp. 3-18. Patkus, R.& Rapple, B.A. (2000). Changing the culture of libraries- the role of core values. Library Administration & Management, 14 (4), 197-203. Sawhney, M. & Emanuela P. (2000), Communities of creation: managing distributed innovation in turbulent markets, California Management Review, 24-54 Shein, E. (1996). Three cultures of management: the key to organizational learning. Organization Theory Sloan Management Review, 37 (3), 9-20. Storck, J. & Hill, P. (2000). Knowledge diffusion through strategic communities. MIT Sloan Management Review, 41 (2), 63-74. Vedder, R.G., Vanecek, M.T., Guynes, C.S. & Cappel, J.J. (1999). CEO and CIO perspectives on competitive intelligence. Communications of the ACM, 42 (8), 108-116. Victor, B. & Stephens, C. (1994)The dark side of the new organizational forms: an editorial essay. Organization Science, 5 (4), 479-482. Wenger, E. & Synder, W. (2000). Communities of practice: the organizational frontier.\ Harvard Business Review, 1, 139-145.

5