Competing Values in Organizations: Contextual Influences and Structural Consequences

Abstract

Managers recognize that they must satisfy a variety of demands, some contradictory. The authors investigated this circumstance using Quinn and Rohrbaugh's competing values model. They report the findings of a study that identified and measured the four competing values (internal process value, rational goal value, human relations value, and open system value) across organizations and investigated whether contextual and structural variables were systematically associated with those value sets. Data were gathered from a large sample of United States Air Force Commands. Results showed that the operating units pursued the four values defined by the model, but did not emphasize them equally. Certain environmental characteristics (information and resource scarcity and technological uncertainty) and aspects of the units' technology (their task routineness, workflow interdependence, and training complexity) were associated with organizational value sets. The values emphasized were associated in turn with the coordinating structure (vertical or horizontal coordination) adopted by the units. The study attempted to move the competing values model beyond theoretical concepts. The results confirm the competing values at work in organizations and also suggest that value sets differ from unit to unit. Certain patterns of values appear to exist within particular environmental and technological contexts. These findings indicate tradeoffs among values. Emphasizing some values may hamper pursuit of others. So when managers decide to give priority to programs designed to strengthen to the human relations value, efficiency and short-term profitability may drop off. Managers must be aware of this shifting balance. They must evaluate whether prescriptions for organizational success make sense. Decisions should reflect the organization's value structure (and its deficiencies), its technology, its environment, and its structure as well as show these elements fit together.

Paradox Research in Management Science: Looking Back to Move Forward

“…Some studies describe the underlying elements of paradox as complementary, noting how they inform one another and are both vital for longterm success (Buenger, Daft, Conlon, & Austin, 1996). Other studies suggest a more integrated relationship, depicting the elements as mutually constituted -each pole containing the seeds of its opposite (Khazanchi, Lewis, & Boyer, 2007) and ontologically inseparable such that one does not exist without the other (Orlikowski & Scott, 2015 Studies further explore whether the relationships between opposing poles are socially constructed or inherent to organizing (see Clegg, 2002).…”

Testing success factors for manufacturing BPR project phases

“…Bowns and McNulty [6], and Gulden and Reck [22] also list important factors: (1) reengineering results from large-scale changes to a business process, organizational structures, management systems and values, so executives must carefully target critical (though crossfunctional) business processes; (2) executives should correct organizational procedures focused on satisfying internal demands rather than the marketplace; and (3) focus on outcome rather than task. Other factors proposed are: (1) technology is viewed as an enabler, not a solution [27]; (2) let doers be the decision makers [23]; (3) use automation to reduce costs and response times [20]; (4) do not compromise quality improvements [16,31]; (5) project initiated and led by top managers accountable for the project's success [6,29]; (6) use surveys to find what's working; (7) be open about what you're doing, when, and why [5,37,47]; and (8) adopt an integrated planning approach [21,54]. Success factors identified and collected from the literature are summarized in Table 1 which shows the arithmetic mean and standard deviation for each item based on the scale used.…”

“…Researchers have found that managers who have a broad view of an organization are in the best position to address that organization's environment, available resources, workflow patterns, and values [7]. Therefore, for this study, top manufacturing managers are likely to be the most appropriate subjects regarding major changes to manufacturing processes.…”

The Efficiency of Innovative Marketing Information System: An Empirical Study of Tourism Industry of Pakistan

“…This prospect that organizations lay emphasis on various efficiency methodology and criteria has also established experiential support in the work of Buenger et al (1996). As a consequence, a contradiction that arises regarding the coexistence of steadiness and sequence (internal process values), seeing as coping with such situation frequently calls for organizations that are at the same time unwavering and energetic.…”