No abstract

No abstract

Since a theory of organization can be no better than the assumption it makes about the human personality, this paper reviews and comments on the ways different theories have dealt with, or contributed to, the "structuralistic" versus "personalistic" dilemma. The several views are classed under four conceptual rubrics: (a) traditional structural approaches (e.g., Marx and Weber), (b) modern structural approaches (e.g., Argyris and McGregor), (c) personalistic views (e.g., perceptual theories), and (d) integrating approaches (e.g., system and role models). It is concluded that the extreme variability found within and among organizations renders the one-sided normative theories less useful in understanding organizational behavior than models that recognize situational contingencies.1 Requests for reprints should be sent to C.

No abstract

In the search for recidivism-reducing strategies, intensive probation programs featuring enhanced social services and lower officer caseloads have become a high priority in many correctional jurisdictions. The field experiment reported here employed random assignment of newly sentenced property offenders to intensive or regular probation. A variety of variables, including demographic and past criminal behavior indices, were used to relate service referrals and use of services by clients to multiple measures of recidivism. Analysis of variance, multiple regression, and survival analysis were employed to analyze these data. The results reveal that intensive probation is not measurably superior to conventional procedures. When probationers receive only sparse services or referrals from the probation department, they will secure such services on their own. For felonious property offenders, regular probation is less expensive than intensive probation and no less effective with regard to recidivism.