Structural couplings between organizations and function systems

Knudsen, Morten

doi:10.1057/9780230365391_6

Cited by 25 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The linkages between an organization and function systems are achieved by structural couplings (Stichweh, 1999;Knudsen, 2007). This means that the organization adjusts its structures to fit the structures of function systems, thus allowing the organizations to react to observed changes in the environment (Seidl, 2006).…”

Section: Hybrids In Health-care and Organizational Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concealing paradoxes in decision-making during hospital hybridization – a systems theoretical analysis

Jansson

Tuunainen

Mainela

2021

JHOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeWhile previous health-care-related hybridity research has focused on macro- and micro-level investigations, this paper aims to study hybridization at the organizational level, with a specific focus on decision-making. The authors investigate how new politico-economic expectations toward a university hospital as a hybrid organization become internalized via organizational decision-making, resulting in the establishment of a new business collaboration and innovation-oriented unit.Design/methodology/approachThe authors employed a social systems theoretical framework to explore organizational decision-making processes involved in the establishment of the new hybrid hospital unit. Drawing on 15 interviews and nine organizational documents, the authors describe and analyze three decision-making cycles using the concepts of complexity, decision and justification.FindingsThe findings reveal the challenging nature of decision-making during hybridization, as decisions regarding unprecedented organizational structures and activities cannot be justified by traditional decision premises. The authors show that decision-makers use a combination of novel justification strategies, namely, justification by problems, by examples and by obligations, to legitimize decisions oriented at non-traditional activities. Further, the analysis reveals how expectations of several societal systems, i.e. health care, education, science, law, economy and politics, are considered in decision-making taking place in hybrid organizations.Originality/valueThe study draws attention to the complexity of decision-making in a hybrid context and highlights the role of justification strategies in partially reducing complexity by concealing the paradoxical nature of decision-making and ensuring the credibility of resulting decisions. Also, the study presents a move beyond the dualism inherent in many previous hybridity studies by illustrating the involvement of several societal systems in hybridization.

show abstract

Section: Hybrids In Health-care and Organizational Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concealing paradoxes in decision-making during hospital hybridization – a systems theoretical analysis

Jansson

Tuunainen

Mainela

2021

JHOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The contingency of decisions points to the paradox of decisions and the fact that a decision is neither necessary nor certain, but could always have been made differently. This contingency makes connectivity less likely because it calls into question the notion of connecting to a decision that could inherently have been made differently [15]. Connectivity is essential to decisions because it is only the connection to further decisions that can turn a decision into a real decision.…”

Section: Mangers Role In Coordinating Development Plan Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Section manager 2)This discussion was concerned with how the clinic should manage the decision contingencies connected to the development plan. The section manager made the point that without displacing the paradox or handling the contingency[15], there will be no decisions: the various subsystems are not motivated to understand one another and are therefore incapable of reaching an agreement on what should be prioritized in the organization. In the interviews after the meeting, the section managers criticized the work process, calling it "skin-deep democracy": I think the process is being contaminated by "skin-deep democracy," when it should have been [a matter for] good strategic management.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing development plans in the Norwegian healthcare system

Vik¹,

Hansson²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: As part of a national plan to govern professional and organizational development in Norwegian specialist healthcare, the country’s hospital clinics are tasked with making development plans. Using the development plan as case, the paper analyses how managers navigate and legitimize the development plan process among central actors, and deals with the tension between governmental control and organizational autonomy in such strategy work.Method: This study applies a qualitative research design, triangulating different kinds of data. The study was performed in two steps: a) an analysis of various guidelines for development plans and how they are translated through the different levels of Norwegian specialist healthcare, and b) a single-case study of the process of developing a development plan at the clinical level. Findings: Findings shows that the development plan was shaped through a multilevel translation process consisting of different contending rationalities. At the clinical level, the management had difficulties legitimizing the process. Underlying tension between top-down and bottom-up steering challenged their involvement and made it difficult to manage the contingency of decisions.Conclusions: The findings are relevant to public sector managers working on strategy documents, as well as to policymakers identifying challenges that might hinder fulfillment of political intentions. This paper uses a case from Norway; however, the findings are of general interest. It contributes to the academic discussion on how to take account both the health authorities perspective and the organizational perspective in order to understand tensions between control and autonomy, applied to a functionally differentiated health care system.

show abstract

“…They are thereby part of different organizational systems within the scientific system (see e.g. Knudsen 2007 for a discussion of the couplings between organizational and function systems) and their respective disciplines are subject to varying levels of prestige (see Rosinger et al 2016) making comparisons imperfect. We argue, however, that since these cases are used primarily as illustrative cases of how these systems allow themselves to be irritated, and to what extent their decisions are based on these irritations, the differences between the cases are of less importance.…”

Section: Case Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%