Jerald Hage

Organizations working together

Interorganizational Networks A New Institution A Typology of Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships and Networks What is Coordination? Environmental Determinants of Network Systems External Control and Technology Structural Properties Centrality, Size, Complexity, Differentiation, and Connectedness Conflict and Interorganizational Effectiveness The Failure of Evolution Theoretical Implications, Practical Recommendations, and Global Applications

Organizational interdependence and intra-organizational structure.

The relationship between organizational interdependence was investigated specifically the number of joint programs and internal organizational behavior for health and welfare organizations. A model of organizational interdependence produces 5 hypotheses about organizations which are tested with data for 16 social welfare and health organizations located in a midwestern metropolis in 1967. The hypotheses were: a high degree of complexity varies directly with a high number of joint programs; a high degree of program innovation varies directly with a number of joint programs; a high rate of internal communication varies directly with a high number of joint programs; a high degree of centralization varies inversely with a high number of joint programs; and a high degree of formalization varies inversely with a high number of joint programs. 10 organizations were private; 6 were either public or branches of public agencies. These organizations were all the larger welfare organizations that provide rehabilitiation psychiatric services and services for the mentally retarded. Interviews were conducted with 520 staff members of these 16 organizations. The following were among the study findings: 1) organizations with many joint programs were more complex organizations i.e. they were more highly professionalized and had more diversified occupational structures; 2) organizations with many joint programs were more innovative organizations; 3) organizations with many joint programs had more active internal communication channels; 4) organizations with many joint programs had slightly more decentralized decision making structures; and 5) there was no relationship between formalization and the number of joint programs. A greater degree of complexity was observed i.e. more occupational diversity and greater professionalism of staff in those organizations with the most joint programs. Participation in joint programs is 1 mechanism for adding new occupational specialties to the organization at a reduced cost. With an increase in division of labor organizations become more complex and more innovative. The need for resources to support such innovations promotes interdependent relations with organizations and the greater integration of the organizations in a community structure.

Relationship of Centralization to Other Structural Properties

This paper examines two different ways of measuring the distribution of power in sixteen health and welfare orginazations. Participation in decision making about the allocation of organizational resources and the determination of organizational policy was strongly related to the degree of complexity as measured by (1) the number of occupational specialities, (2) the amount of professional training, and (3) the amount of professional activity and was weakly related to the degree of formalization as measured by the degree of job codification and the amount of rule observation. Except for rule observation, hierarchy of authority or the reliance on the chain of command for work decisions was not as strongly related to each of these measures of organizational structure. A partial correlational analysis between each measure of the distribution of power and the five structural properties indicates that participation in decision making retains an association with the first two indicators of complexity and the first indicator of formalization even when the other five variables are controlled simultaneously. The hierarchy of authority retains an association with the amount of professional activity and the amount of rule observation. At the same time, it is important to recognize that these two measures of the distribution of power are themselves strongly interrelated. When decisions about the allocation of organizational resources are centralized, then there is a centralization of work decisions as well. Professors Hage and Aiken are assistant professors of sociology at the University of Wisconsin.

Routine Technology, Social Structure, and Organization Goals

This paper investigates the relationship between organizational technology, specifically the degree of routineness of work, and the social structure and goals of health and welfare organizations.! Hypotheses relating four aspects of social structure and two aspects of organizational goals with the degree of routine work are tested with data from sixteen social welfare and health organizations located in a Midwestern metropolis in 1967. The social structure of organizations with more routine work are found to be more centralized, more formalized, and to have less professionally trained staffs, but no relationship with stratification is found. Organizations with routine work are further found to emphasize goals of efficiency and the quantity of clients served, not innovativeness, staff morale, or quality of client services.

Elite Values Versus Organizational Structure in Predicting Innovation.

Jerald Hage and Robert Dewar This paper compares the predictive power of the concept of elite values with leader values, member values, and the three structural variables of complexity, centralization, and formalization. Elite values proved to be slightly better predictors than either leader values or complexity. When elite values and complexity were combined, there was a considerable increase in the amount of variance explained indicating that these variables are independent. Three contrasting definitions of the elite were considered but one proved a better predictor than the other two.

Organizational Alienation: A Comparative Analysis

The relationship between two types of alienation-alienation from work and alienation from expressive relations-and two structural properties of organizations-centralization and formalization-are examined in a comparative study of sixteen welfare organizations. Both alienation from work and alienation from expressive relations are found to be more prominent in highly centralized and highly formalized organizations. Multivariate analysis is introduced to determine the relative importance of the relationships between measures of centralization and formalization and alienation.

Program change and organizational properties. A comparative analysis.

Empirical indicators of the organizational properties of complexity, centralization, formalization, and morale are developed and related to the rate of adoption of new programs and services in sixteen social welfare organizations. Specifically, a high deree of participation in agency-wide decisions, a low deree of job condification, and a high degree of job satisfactions are found to be most highly associated with a high rate of program change. Measures of staff attitudes toward change are forund to be only weakly and inversely to the rate of innovation of new programs and techniques. The relationships between organizational properties and rate of program change largely remained when size, auspices, age of oranization and function were controlled. The distinction between rate of program change and changes in decision making, job codification, and job satisfaction allows us to discuss changes within a system and changes of a system of organizational properties.

An Axiomatic Theory of Organizations

The organizational variables of complexity, centralization, formalization, stratification, adaptiveness, production, efficiency, and job satisfaction are defined. These variables are interrelated in seven basic propositions as suggested by the theoretical writings of Weber, Barnard, and Thompson. Then the seven propositions are used to derive twentyone corollaries and to define two ideal types of organizational systems. A limits proposition is suggested. The axiomatic theory, consisting of twenty-nine hypotheses, is tested against a number of research studies and receives considerable support. It appears useful in analyzing a number of organizational problems, including organizational change, centralization versus decentralization, and morale. The author is an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology at the University of Wisconsin.

Size, Technology, Complexity, and Structural Differentiation: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis.

This paper proposes a theoretical synthesis of the concepts of organizational size, technology, complexity, and structural differentiation. It suggests and finds that the most important determinant of differentiation in the division of labor is the scope of an organizations task, a technological dimension, and not organizational size. Neither horizontal nor vertical differentiation is thought to be determined by size while the scope of the task is proposed as a determinant of horizontal differentiation. The findings, however, support only the inference of a moderate causal connection between either size or task scope and either form of differentiation. Throughout the analysis and discussion the contrast between causal inference based on associations of levels and change rates is discussed. When dealing with the organizational processes addressed in this paper, both associations must be examined to adequately portray the complexity of the causal processes inferred.

Organization Structure and Communications

A theoretical model is developed in which organizational structure is related to the type of coordination in the organization-planning or programming versus feedback or mutual adjustment. It is argued that the nature of the mechanism of coordination employed in the organization in turn affects the volume and direction of communications in the organization. Hypotheses are developed relating the variables of complexity, formalization, and centralization to communication rates. These hypotheses are tested in a 1967 study of 16 health and welfare organizations using a number of different measures of communications. In general, interdepartmental communications, both scheduled and unscheduled, are found to be affected most by these structural characteristics.