Combining Theoretical Perspectives on the Organizational Structure-Performance Relationship

Abstract

Abstract:Much of the literature linking organization structure to performance falls into two broad research streams. One stream concerns formal structure -the hierarchy of authority or reporting relationships as well as the degree of standardization, formalization, specialization, etc. The impact of formal structure and other elements of organization design on performance is typically contingent on factors such as strategic orientation, task characteristics, and environmental conditions. The other research stream focuses on informal structure -a network of interpersonal and intra-organizational relationships. Properties of informal structure are typically shown to have a more direct (less contingent) impact on organizational performance. Despite these pronounced differences in the conceptualization of organization structure, considerable overlap and complementarity exist between the two research streams. In this article, I compare and contrast a pair of exemplars from each stream -the information processing perspective and the social network perspective -with respect to their conceptualizations of organization structure and its relationship to performance. Several recommendations for future research that combines the two approaches are offered.

Biçimsel ve Biçimsel Olmayan Örgüt Yapılarının Sosyal Ağ Analizi: Öneri ve Güven Ağları Örneği

“…Örgüte konumsal bakış, işgörenlerin örgütte pozisyonlarını ve rollerini; ilişkisel bakış, örgütteki bireylerin, biçimsel ilişkileriyle tutarlı ya da tutarlı olmayan ağ etkileşimlerini; kültürel bakış ise bireylerin örgütlerdeki etkileşiminin, hem yapının hem de bireyin ötesine giden ortak bir temel yapı tarafından belirlenmesine odaklanır. Hunter (2015) örgüt analizi araştırmalarını genel olarak iki ana akımda değerlendirmiştir. Birincisinde, örgütün biçimsel yapısı üzerinde durulmuştur.…”

“…Buna göre, ağ içindeki en büyük alt grup olan ve yöneticilerin büyük bir bölümünün yer aldığı birinci alt grupta 18 aktör, ikinci alt grupta 9 aktör, üçüncü ve dördüncü alt gruplarda 7'şer aktör ve en küçük alt grup olan beşincisinde 5 aktörün yer aldığı bulunmuştur (Tablo 7). 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11,16, 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 42 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 Alt Grup 2 (Siyah grup) 4,10,13,17,19,32,43,44,45 4 Alt Grup 3 (Mavi Grup) 7,15,34,37,38,39,41 7 Alt Grup 4 ( Sarı Grup) 12,22,23,25,27,33,18,20,21,Araştırmada biçimsel olmayan ağ içindeki beş parçalı bölünmede yönetici grubun büyük bir bölümünün en büyük alt grupta yer aldığı, bu grupta yer alanlarının öz-değerleri en yüksek aktörleri (6,26,27,28,30,31,35,36, 42 numaralı aktörler) de içerdiği anlaşılmaktadır. Bu gruptaki aktörlerin kurumdaki bazı yöneticiler (1, 2, 3, 5, 6 numaralı aktörler) etrafında özellikle de ağ içindeki en etkin aktör olan 6 numaralı aktör etrafında kümelendikleri anlaşılmaktadır.…”

If Ever the Twain Shall Meet: Graph Theoretical Dimensions of Formal and Informal Organization Structure

“…As noted by Hunter (2015), the idea that formal and informal structure could and should be studied together and with similar terminology is not new. In fact, this point was made emphatically, almost four full decades ago, by Tichy & Fombrun (1979, p. 926) in their discussion about "prescribed" and "emergent" structures:…”

“…the number of levels in the hierarchy (Maguire, 2009;Armandi & Mills, 1985;Carillo & Kopelman, 1991). At the same levels of analysis, organizational sociology has continued to focus on informal or emergent relationships such as inter-personal communications (Cummings & Cross, 2003;Crowston & Howison, 2006) While there is little if any empirical research that incorporates both formal and informal measures of structure, three studies have established a foundation for doing so-Krackhardt (1994), Everett &Krackhardt (2012), andHunter (2015). In the former the author identified four, independent, graph theoretical measures that "establish a pure structure as a standard against which other structures can be compared" and which thereby specify the degree to which any informal organization or other social system is hierarchically structured.…”

Synergy of Top Management Team Demographics, Strategy and Structure: Empirical Evidence on Performance of Public Enterprises

“…The theory holds that while a firm may copy another's strategy, it can never copy the way strategy elements; TMT demographics and organizational structure are configured into a synergetic whole to produce stellar performance (Miller & Friesen, 1984). According to Hunter (2015), organizations are organized into formal structure whereby they exhibit a hierarchical pattern of authority relationships that varies along key measurable structural dimensions including: specialization, span of control, vertical and horizontal differentiation, centralization, and formalization. This implies that organizations maintain prescribed reporting relationships and their correlates.…”