This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Greenfield, T. B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Organizations as Social Inventions: Rethinking Assumptions About Change

Ontario Institute; University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Can we improve organizations by shaping their structure and processes? Common sense and much of organization theory support the view that it is organization itself which oppresses people and prevents them from realizing their best intentions. Acting on this view, critics and change agents have tried either to abolish structure or to design it to serve humane ends. Upon examination, however, abstract notions of organization resolve into goals and values held by individuals; putative universal organizational forms reduce to cultural artifacts. In searching for a concept of organization which recognizes its base in human action rather than in objective structure, the author draws upon a European tradition stemming from the works of Max Weber. This tradition, combined with examples of organizational life in schools, serves to identify implications for those who attempt-often with little success-to design better organizational forms. These implications suggest that our problems with schools will not yield to our manipulating the external trappings of organization-their familiar but spurious "structures." Rather, we must deal with the often conflicting views and values of those acting within these structures. The task of changing organizations depends, first, upon the varieties of reality which individuals see in existing organizations, and second, upon their acceptance of new ideas of what can or should be achieved through social action. We know little about either, but it is clear we should understand the first before we attempt to direct the second.

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 9, No. 5, 551-574 (1973)
DOI: 10.1177/002188637300900502


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Rhodes Book Review Symposium: Educational Leadership: Ambiguity, Professionals and Managerialism: by Eric Hoyle and Mike Wallace. London: SAGE Publications, 2005, 212 pages, ISBN 0-7619-6743-5 (pbk), ISBN 0-7619-6742-7 (hbk), {pound}24.99 Educational Management Administration Leadership, July 1, 2007; 35(3): 429 - 439. [PDF]

				E. Samier Weber on Education and its Administration: Prospects for Leadership in a Rationalized World Educational Management Administration Leadership, January 1, 2002; 30(1): 27 - 45. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Bush Crisis or Crossroads?: The Discipline of Educational Management in the Late 1990s Educational Management Administration Leadership, July 1, 1999; 27(3): 239 - 252. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. L. Anderson and J. Grinberg Educational Administration as a Disciplinary Practice: Appropriating Foucault's View of Power, Discourse, and Method Educational Administration Quarterly, August 1, 1998; 34(3): 329 - 353. [Abstract]

				J. J. Stapleton Thomas Greenfield and the Study of Decision Making Educational Management Administration Leadership, October 1, 1994; 22(4): 232 - 242.

				G. L. Anderson Toward A Critical Constructivist Approach to School Administration: Invisibility, Legitimation, and the Study of Non-Events Educational Administration Quarterly, February 1, 1990; 26(1): 38 - 59. [Abstract]

				R. J. Bates Corporate Culture, Schooling, and Educational Administration Educational Administration Quarterly, November 1, 1987; 23(4): 79 - 115. [Abstract]

				I. Cunningham Planning to Develop Managers Management Learning, June 1, 1984; 15(2): 83 - 104. [Abstract]

				D. M. Boje, D. B. Fedor, and K. M. Rowland Myth Making: A Qualitative Step in OD Interventions Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 1, 1982; 18(1): 17 - 28. [Abstract] [PDF]