Organizational Dilemmas in Voluntary Associations

Abstract

Robert Michels stated that all democratic organizations sooner or later end up as ruled by the few. But are there certain dilemmas forcing organizations more or less easily into the oligarchic path? In the interview material from six small voluntary associations such dilemmas were identified. Dilemmas seemed to arise regarding representativeness and competence among leaders, handling of external forces, interpretation of goals, and maintaining commitment. Some of the dilemmas were implicit, some were more explicitly acknowledged. It is concluded that the "iron law of oligarchy" is avoidable, if the organization becomes aware of these dilemmas.

Governance, Organization, and Democracy on the Internet: The Iron Law and the Evolution of Wikipedia

“…The ease and transparency of communications affect many debates about Wikipedia among the editors, raising their the awareness of Iron‐Law‐related issues. Jonsson and Zakrisson (2005) indicate that an organization whose members are aware of the problem is more likely to deal with it; their analysis specifically concerned awareness of the tendency toward oligarchization. Thus wiki technology creates a powerful anti‐oligarchic deterrent, putting all members on a level playing ground, and allowing the idealistic anti‐oligarchic majority, aware of the Iron Law, to screen out possible pro‐oligarchy proposals.…”

Understanding Reporting and Problem-Solving Behaviors in a High Reliability Organization: A Case Study in a Spanish Nuclear Company

“…Multiple studies advocate the existence of different dilemmas within organizations from a variety of methodological and qualitative perspectives. In this way, Jonsson & Zakrisson (2005) highlight the dilemmas that face leaders of non-governmental organizations. Psychology Studies on reporting show there are a number of dilemmas associated to the problem reporting act.…”

A seamless partnership? Developing mixed economy interventions in a non-custodial project for women

“…While voluntary sector work with offenders was relatively uncontroversial while they were performing ‘complementary’ roles in niche areas of care, their involvement became more controversial when charities sought to undertake more substantial work (Corcoran, 2011). Debates about the legitimacy of the voluntary sector’s role in working with offenders, victims or communities are occasionally elevated to questions about their competence, ‘qualifications’, experience and legal accountability for outcomes (Jonsson and Zakrisson, 2005). One of the trustees for the Chestnut Centre asserted their credentials as legitimate actors in working with vulnerable women and women who offend by emphasizing the parent organization’s established presence and reputation as a social provider in the area.…”