Criticisms of the Dominant Perspective on Organizations

Abstract

The major criticisms of the dominant comparative structural and structural contingency approaches to organizations were examined and found to possess at least ten major limitations. These structural approaches have resulted in an emphasis on organizational efficiency, goals, consensus, statics, and constraints of the environment, size, and technology which perpetuate the status quo; but the analysis of power, change, conflicts of interest, and individual volition have been obscured. Although structural analysis has resulted in some limited abstract generalizations concerning the form of organizations, these generalizations do little to contribute to understanding organizational processes, strategic choice, and power relationships. These important aspects of organizations could be unmasked by viewing organizations as arenas of micro-individual and group interests as well as arenas through which macrosocietal, class, and multinational interests and conflicts are played out. To minimize these limitations in the analysis of organizations, triangulations of perspectives, levels of analysis, sources of data, and methodologies are suggested.

A Critical Framework for Organizational Analysis

“…Furthermore, the critics argue that the majority of organization-theoretical studies are primarily geared to issues which are mainly of interest to business management circles, whose chief objective is to augment the efficiency of organizations. For a summary of this criticism, see Zey-Ferrell (1982). A large part of critical organization research -which has, of course, not been in evidence for very long, and the proportions of which are as yet fairly modest -has aimed at supplying critical scrutinies of the mainstream in organization theory, as well as articulating the problems with which it is associated.…”

“…This criticism has been based on different critical viewpoints, Marxist aspects among them; see for instance Benson (1977a;1977b), Burrell and Morgan (1979), Clegg and Dunkerley (1980), Zey-Ferrell (1982) and Zey-Ferrell and Aiken (1981). The critics have objected to those perspectives which emanate from the assumption that consensus is characteristic of social relationships and norm systems.…”

Telling stories, reflecting, learning: hannah arendt and organization

“…If, primarily, the restrictions and necessities characterising organizational life are considered, it belongs to the category of labour. However, organizations cannot be completely reduced to a tool dimension as organization theory has shown for a long time (Georgiou, 1973;Zey-Ferrell, 1981;Brunsson, 1982). There are phenomena which elude an explanation in terms of pure purpose orientation.…”

Rational Choice and Organization Theory

“…However, the term has different meanings (Zey-Ferrell, 1981) for RCT and OT. However, the term has different meanings (Zey-Ferrell, 1981) for RCT and OT.…”