| From Hierarchy to Egalarchy: The Changing Scope of Personal Sovereignty at Work |
| | Neilsen, Eric H. | Case Western Reserve U. | ehn@po.cwru.edu | (216)-932-4424 |
| | This article reviews the changing scope of personal sovereignty in the U.S. workplace; from high levels in the agrarian economy of the 1700's, to low levels with the rise of big business in the late 1800's, to the return to high levels starting in the 1920's and continuing through today. The conditions embodying high personal sovereignty are described as egalarchy, a typification we offer to suggest the inverse of hierarchy. Egalarchy can be divided into four dimensions: emotional, intellectual, procedural and directional, and its spread involves the cumulative acceptance of equality along those dimensions in the workplace.
The gradual alternations between egalarchy and hierarchy are contrasted with the shorter term alternations between surges in rational and normative management ideologies posited by Barley and Kunda (ASQ,37:363-399). The interaction between the two trends today creates a major challenge for proponents of diversity. Rising egalarchy is giving people greater freedom to define themselves in the workplace. Simultaneously, rational management ideologies, geared to the management of capital in times of economic prosperity, may give little attention to the human element. Thus, the high level of egalarchy today may be fostering the expansion of diversity at work while surging rational ideologies are giving its thoughtful management short shrift. High turnover and increased divisiveness may result. |
| | Keywords: change; history; equality |
| Everyday Thinking in Organizational Change: The Role of 'Organizing Man'. |
| | Lowstedt, Jan | Stockholm School of Economics | Jan.Lowstedt@hhs.se | 46-8-7369466 |
| |
Abstract
This paper discusses the role of everyday thinking in and about organizations in theories of organizational change and development. It shows how traditional theories of organizational structure use externalistic and/or materialistic explanations for organizational change. Previous criticism of such explanations has focused on the role of strategic choice and the influence from dominant actors and coalitions in the organization,. According to recent studies, organizational members show different repertoires of organizational thinking and such differences in organizational frameworks and local theories have been shown to correspond to structural changes in organizations. Therefore, it is argued that the ‘organizing man’ is the missing piece that would enable a broader understanding of change in organizations.
|
| | Keywords: change; thinking; organizing |
| Organizational Change as an Infective Process |
| | Ford, Jeffrey D. | Ohio State U. | ford.1@osu.edu | (614)-292-4563 |
| | This paper proposes that organizational change can be understood as an infective process in which new conversations are introduced into an already existing network of conversations. Where these new conversations are sufficiently infective, they propagate, producing new actions, behaviors, and practices in the organization. In successful changes, these new conversations become endemic within the organization. However, where there is sufficient conversational immunity, new conversations are unable to establish themselves and there is no significant alteration in the organization. Factors that contribute to the infectivity of conversations and the implications of this perspective to the conduct of change are presented. |
| | Keywords: change; conversations; infection |
| Community in the Workplace |
| | Koch, James L. | Santa Clara U. | jkoch@scu.edu | (408) 551-1785 |
| | Rossi, Robert J. | American Institutes for Research | brossi@air-ca.org | (650) 843-8161 |
| | Royal, Mark A. | International Survey Research | markr@isrsurveys.com | (312) 828-9725 |
| | This article examines the psychological sense of community (SOC) and its relevance to important dynamics in work organizations. It reviews early research in community psychology as well as recent organizational literature which has examined community and its relationship to individual well being and organizational effectiveness. It also reports on a critical incidents study which identified eleven dimensions of community. These dimensions reflect the cognitive, affective, and process-related characteristics associated with occasions when individuals experience a particularly strong sense of community. These dimensions confirm earlier, a priori formulations of the community construct-with the exception of incorporation of diversity, respect and recognition, factors not previously identified as characteristics of community.
As a relational construct, SOC has particular relevance to non-hierarchic, network organizations. In these improvisational settings a sense of common enterprise, engagement, and relationships of trust and mutual respect can overcome the limitations of hierarchies and fragmented or specialized knowledge. A number of research propositions are developed to explicate the role of community in the workplace. Size, hierarchic status differentials, contingent workers, diversity, top-down models of change, and virtual teams are all posited to undermine community. Conversely, "human resources investment" philosophies, values-driven cultures, collaborative processes, and high performance work practices are posited to contribute to SOC. Building community in organizations contributes to social capital, individual well being, and performance.
|
| | Keywords: Community; Loyalty; Social Capital |