See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313967610

Adhocracy

Chapter · January 2015

DOI: 10.1002/9781118785317.weom110029

CITATIONS READS

0 844

1 author:

Brian Harney
Dublin City University
67 PUBLICATIONS   498 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Global Entrepreneurial Talent Management 3 View project

Employment and SMEs View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Brian Harney on 03 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

adhocracy
Brian Harney
Adhocracy is an organizational form which
emerged as the antithesis of bureaucracy. In
1964 Slater and Bennis heralded the emergence
of a democratic type of organization staffed with
diverse expert specialists assembled for specific
purposes. The term “adhocracy” was coined
by Toffler (1971) who envisioned adhocracy
evolving to be the administrative norm. While
bureaucratic structures are formal, fixed, and
standardized, adhocracy is informal, temporal,
and fluid. A critical feature of adhocracy is that
the hierarchy and formal role specifications
characteristic of bureaucracy are replaced by
lateral relations and a reliance on staff expertise.
Adhocracies are staffed with experts formally
trained in specific skills who assume respon-
sibility for key decisions and activities. These
professional members align their expertise
to work on a project by project basis, fusing
domains of expertise in a temporal fashion
(Mintzberg, 1979). The precise configuration of
experts is contingent on the problem at hand.
The absence of formal structure and fixed roles
means that an adhocracy is readily able to adapt
to each situation that it confronts. Control in
adhocracies comes from lateral coordination as
opposed to traditional hierarchy.
Adhocracies create an infrastructure which
encourages innovation, analytical problem
solving and retains close proximity to the
external environment. Adhocracy is, therefore,
most beneficial in complex and dynamic environ-
ments exemplified by present day knowledge-
intensive and professional service firms. In such
firms lateral relations allows for complex innova-
tion and much greater sensitivity to change and
adjustment (Mintzberg and McHugh, 1985).
Adhocracies are also found in newly devel-
oping industries, high-risk organizations, and
Wiley Encyclopedia of Management, edited by Professor Sir Cary L Cooper.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
View publication stats
temporary organizations. The highly organic,
horizontal management structures of adhocracy
allow for greater sharing of ideas and collab-
oration, meaning it overcomes much of the
deficiencies of bureaucratic structure.
While long since advocated as the organiza-
tional structure of the future, adhocracies do
suffer from notable limitations. These include
slow decision making, confusion in terms of
the locus of responsibility, and difficulty in
monitoring behavior. For those working in an
adhocracy, the temporal nature of projects can
lead to frustration and a lack of continuity, while
pathways of career progression may not always
be obvious. These characteristics reflect the fact
that adhocracy lacks features characteristic of
stable structures of old. It also means adhocracies
are a rich site for research on knowledge manage-
ment, new forms of control, and the manage-
ment of professionals (Greenwood et al., 2010).
See also organizational structure
Bibliography
Galbraith, J. (1973) Designing Complex Organisations,
Addison-Wesley, Reading.
Greenwood, R., Morris, T., Fairclough, S. and Boussebaa,
M. (2010) The organizational design of transnational
professional service firms. Organization Dynamics, 39,
173–183.
Mintzberg, H. (1979) The Structuring of Organisations,
Prentice Hall.
Mintzberg, H. and McHugh, A. (1985) Strategy forma-
tion in an adhocracy. Administrative Science Quarterly,
30, 160–197.
Slater, P. and Bennis, W. (1964) Democracy is inevitable.
Harvard Business Review, 42, 51–59.
Toffler, A. (1971) Future Shock, Bantam, New York.