10

. tions we can see that in most organizations sorn~

Looking at th_ese tox1~demblo Ho~ever the skills of toxic handlers ultimate}"1
• ·ty 1s unavo1 a e. ' • b ·
level o f r?x1a . t work either disastrous or enabling. Think a out situations
make toxic emotions ayou have e1u1 ··Ler ha.ndled toxic emotions or caused thern.
llfi • which
in your . e m J f team situation that ilJustrates how toxic workplaces
Here is an examp e o a I l "d t .
's (2003) seven deadly INs are c ear hy evi en inl this
operate Many of Fros t
When Tyrone was much younger, around 15 years old, e was emp oyeq
case.
as part of a team worki'ng
i·n a kitchen. Two middle-aged . brothers (whom we
wiJI call Nick and John) ran the cafe in a very unethic_aJ way. Many of the
• Ju di ng Tyrone, were working illegally because Nick and John had not
sta ff., me
registered their staff with the tax department, Knowing that Tyrone and the
others were young and inexperienced, Nick and John would have them work
extremely Jong hours without breaks, did not pay _p ension an~ other com~u1.
sory contributions, never logged overtime and did not provide appropriate
training _ after aJI, they had no training themselves (to use F~ost's terms, an
example of incompetence). If employees questioned these conditions, they were
either ridiculed or fired (intention). One day, Tyrone cut his finger very badly
while working, slicing the tip off. John took him to the hospital but instructed
Tyrone to say it happened while Tyrone was visiting John at home and that if
he said otherwise, he would be fired (insensitivity). After about two weeks,
Tyrone returned to the cafe, where he was told he was no longer needed. He
received neither severance pay nor the previous two weeks' pay. Six months
later, Tyrone complained to the Industrial Relations Commission that he had
been underpaid, unfairly dismissed and exploited. Interestingly, only two other
team members supported Tyrone on the issue; the rest of the team decided
to keep quiet and keep working. Eventually, however, Nick and John filed for
bankruptcy, never paying a cent to anyone and got away with behaving in
unethical ways (institutional). In this situation. the team's reluctance to respond
to the toxicity ended badly for all involved.
Each of the toxic emotions that Frost identifies can have devastating effects on
people. The seventh deadly IN is inevitability and refers to the pain that comes
from natural and human-made disasters. A team of al-Qaeda terrorists flew two
airliners into the World Trade Center twin towers on 11 September 2001. The aim
was to cause as much pain as possible to the USA and its allies. However, out of
that pain also emerged great bravery and teamwork. The bravery of the teams of
men and women of the New York Fire Department is now legendary. However,
the NYFD had to deal with immense organizational pain and managers had to
be trained and skilled in dealing with high levels of emotional anxiety, depres-
sion and post-traumatic stress disorder. So what is the point of toxic handling?
The management of toxic emotions is a critical component of managing people.
More importantly, we do not need disasters on a grand scale to cause toxicity at
work because many managers, as Frost points out, are quite capable of creating
a range of toxic environments.
Stein (2007) has shown how toxicity can be rife in the workplace. He shows
how toxicity in organizations is not necessarily only caused internally by poor
leaders or managers and colleagues but also by customers. Clearly, toxicity at
work can take many forms and working in a bad team can be one of the most
toxic experiences you can have at work. Practising compassion at work might

36
 101

seem a bit too soft and not really the role of managers. However, Kanov et al .
czo04) show that doing the 'soft' stuff can actually be the hardest thing we can
do as we relate to and work with others in teams and organizations generally.
compassion at work can alleviate many of the toxic emotions that organizations
and man~gers create and which we have dealt with throughout this chapter. The
problem IS, as Frost has shown us, that practising compassion and handling tox-
icity at work are costly in human terms.
TypicaJly, toxic handJers fulfil vital but often formally unrecognized tasks for
their organizations. Often, they burn out doing it. Think of them as filters that
help remove the toxins that the organization or particular members in it can create.
Although they may help to cleanse the organization, their doing so carries pro-
found personal costs - they have to hear, share and bear the misery and pain that
the organization imposes on those it employs. Often, because the sources of the
to,dcity are people in formally authoritative and senior roles in the organization,
there ls little that they can actually do to rectify the situation. If organizations
reward or are run by thugs, bullies and the diplomatically challenged, expect
toxicity to be pervasive. The best remedy is compassion but this commodity is
often a tender, precious and vulnerable bloom, easily trampled by the foolhardy
wsensitivity of others, especially those in positions of formal authority.

d
READ THE FULL
ARTICLE

[I]
READ THE
ARTICLE

37
 IC

SUM~A RY
In this chapter, we have defined teamwork and emphasized the importance of learns -_,
organizations and lhe organizational challenges of managing teams: IVit~i~

Teams are an important form of mobilizing
people at work that stimulate human
relations that are productive, cohesive
and aligned to organizational outcomes.
Tearn outcomes are influenced by
dynamics such as group size, cohesion
and social facilitation, conformance and
obedience.
what organizational tasks they are f
orilled
to wor k on. Comp Iex task-orient d
e tea
often develop in non-linear, dynarn· Ills
IC \Va,1,
Managing teams requir
es a
understanding of issues such ~
groupthink and social loafing, as Well as
other more toxic downsides and IV as
. , an~
overcoming such obstacles.

Teams develop in different ways and

through different stages depending on

Q , torming, because ro.em ~rs O t e team are joc eying qr position and doinin~hce ~
I ideas; Q2, Norming, becau\e an.agreed pro~ess -t~at thQ team ~ill follow ~as emerged
and has been agreed. , • ·
I t,,

t. HavinJJ reaq thrs chapter1you ~hould be able to say (h yo~r own w,ords ~hat ·each of
the follot¥tng key, terms means1 Test yours~lf,or a,sk a <:ollEt3gt1e·t1> test you.
' . ~ 'ff . .

o Teams ' · '.Q ~orm~I group '

0 Soc\i;1I facilitation
0
0
.
Groups 0
i
lnf9r1T1al group

0 Out-group ' O Tol(rc emotions

0 Group dynamics 0 .Role conflict

0 Closed grp_up 0 Toxic handling

0 Crowdsourcing 0 Social loafing

0 Open group 0 Groupthink

\
I '{c
0 Team roles 0 Virtual teams.

2, What are some of the similarities and differences between face-to-face teems and
virtual teams that a manager should know about when managing teems?

38
►

. ~J 1 r ,, -1

REVISE KEY
TERMS

TEST YOURSELF

39
 r~"....
'~ ♦ '

'.

f-:
L-}~·•.,
,:

r· : • ~~
' i5.-
r
f.
I'

r: ·~
l . ,.:.~~{ .··".14
.
t ,to~·e -··
,,· .
,.,9 ...

I'. ' p'r~9'e~\f

;,,\'

f:·. m~~b~r-:.
'
loweririg t
-tp_geth~r.

40
 ~£. •; . . .
105
\ J:r~ C-,,CJt-

~DDITl 0t'1AL RESOURCES

• A movie about bonding, social facilitation and cohesion with a differ-
ence is Fury (2014) by David Ayer. It follows a five-man crew led by
Brad Pitt as they try to achieve insurmountable goals. A new recruit
has to learn to bond with the team and learns fairly brutally the ten-
sions and complexity of working (or not working) as part of a team,
of roles and psychological contracts (you are here to kill or you get
ki1led).

• Another war film but it is brilliant: Oliver Stone's (1986) Platoon is a

story about the devastating effects of team conflict and social influence
on behaviour. As two leaders start to fight a personal war during the
Vietnam conflict, soldiers begin to pick sides and eventually they are
fighting and killing no longer only the 'enemy' but also each other.
The movie is a strong symbol of how individuals can subvert team
goals in order to meet their own interests and how team members can
easily find themselves in the in- and out-groups, and suffering from
groupthink.
• Some excellent, well-written and informative books written by some
of the world's leading experts on teamwork are: West et al. (2003)
International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperati-ve
Working, and West (2003) Effective Teamwork: Practical Lessons from
organizational Research - Psychology of Work and Organizations.
Both books are excellent resources for understanding the psychology
of teams, how teams are best designed and managed, the problems
faced in teamwork and how problems can be minimized and con-
trolled. We also strongly recommend The Captatn Class by Wall Street
Journal deputy editor Sam Walker (2017) - available as a Kindle book
at Amazon, published by Ebury Digital. Using years of experience and
analysis of sports teams, Walker provides some excellent insights into
what makes a successful team.

41
 1 --- Ab ou t Th is Bo ok

1 Intr odu ctio n

I.I
tions expectiog ·ce~tainty and
I cam e to the stud y of peop le ih organizasciences. I ·anticipated that I
abso lute knowledge_ in the- beha viou ral
r o~people and of organi~ations
wou ld find laws &?vernmg the beha viou
. of the physical sciences. I was
as sure ~d _as io:imutable as the laws
epts and Jdeas abo_unding. I found, too
disa ppo inte d. _I "found conc
obvious a!}d weighty investigation
. ofte n, pon de!o us confirmation of the
ble laws were not ther e, organiza-
of trivia. But -the und erly ing unal tera
effic ient, and the most exciting of the
tion s rem a~~ d ·onty patchily . .
idea s did no~ alw a~ work.
.,.'J •
ght dism ay and disillusio nment.•
This disa ppo intm ent initially brou som e _e~ce ptio ns in
, perh aps with
But then I cam e to realize that tion s is not to
of peop le in organiza
physiological psych~logy, the stud y reas ons:
very good
do with pred ictiv e cert aint y - for two
al
I The multiplicity of vari able
s impinging on any one otgaiiizatioti
ests over sixty ) that data on all
situ atio n is so -gre at (Fig ure I sugg
ise outc ome of that multiple
of them sufficient -to pred ict. the prec
tice be forthcoming:
inte r~re latio ns~p wou ld neve r in prac
rent abil ity of th~ huinart bein g to override
2 Wh at ~eems to be the inhe
ur.
man y of the influences on his be~ avio
, shou ld be explain:ed by the kind
Org aniz atio nal phe nom ena, I real ized
rian. Such inte rpre tatio n
of cont extu al inte rpre tatio n used by an histo
som e degr ee of confidence. To
wou ld allow us to pred ict 'tren ds' with
ds, as in the physical sciences,
adq prec ise quantities lo thos e tren
and unrealistic.
wou ldj how ever , be inap prop riate
deli ght in this lack of
/u indi vidu al hu111a~ belngs ·we shou ld take
rant ee of ultim ate independence.
cert aint y sinc e it carries_ with it a gua
rs of peop le, we can take comfort
As man ager s, or pote ntia l orga nize
in the facts that :
 14 Understanding Organlza_tions Abou~ Th(s ·Book . 15
I Most of the variables remain constant most of the time. · begin to understand why the orga~izational theorist will tend to focus
2 Most individuals do not override'the influencing factors most- of the on one group of variables, e.g. the motivation to work, in an attempt
time. · . ! , · _. to get hold of something, and .why the pragmatic manager will respond
3 Most interpretations will be valid for the future :as well as the to the academic's theories by ·sa'ying, 'Yes, that's all very well but-it
past : doesn't help my particular situation.' .
4 Prediction tends to improve as the object of study t;ur~s from indi- The diagram should also reveal the dangers of the lure of the familiar.
viduals fo collections of individuals. Because we know what to do about competition, for instance,·or about
unions, we selectively focus on that vari~ble or group of variabl~ in-any ..
problem situation. Unfortunately selective focusing, if done by habit,
Box x:1
also unfocuses a lot of other variables. I have often myself beet1 swept
Until well into the seventeenth century, sur~ery was Jerfonned not up in enthusiasm for a new form of training (group dynamics is one ex-
by .doctors but by barbers who, untaught and unlettered, applied ample), only to find in the cold'light of practice that .it deals with only
whatever tortures they had picked up during their apprenticC;Ship.
Doctors, observing a literal in_terpretation of .their oatli not to inflict
bodily harm, were too 'ethical; to cut and were not even supposed to alllhnd penon ■ I p ■ rwonaffty
lrnowtedg• sttu■trcn
wa(ch. But the operation, if performed· accoiding to the 11,1les, was aptltude
"'Vie oth•r Abllhy
presided over by a learned doctor who sat on a dais weli above the Kllvl11H expertenca
ct1nd1rd1
st~ggle and read what the barber was supposed to b~ doing aloud noed intnlng
go ■ I&, leadenhlp hla_,a~hy
from a Latin classic (which the barber, of course, did not understanil). ~rbaN
...
history
Needless to say, it was always the barber's fa~lt if the patient di~d, 1111,ulr ■
....
rypa of Modv■tlori 10 Wort
people ■Im

-I>-
and always the doctor's achievement if he survived. And the doctor
got tile bigger fee in either evenL : nlotloft ■l,lpe nfues . ■-p~
-
lr,elol

rww■rd,
lbere is s9me resemblance between the ljtate of surgery' four centuries tast
°' ago and the state of organization theory until recently. Th~re'is no dearth time and
pl ■ ce ..
of books in the field; indeed, organization theory is th~ main subject aha
taught under th_e hcadii:ig of 'management' in many ot qur business Job Rolo
. ago ------------- ---
schools. _T here is a great deal of importance and value irr tliese books - Th•
cohn!on R!r.:ro". EffK11wnns
just as there was a great deal of genuine value in the classical texts on of 1h11
goal ■ ob)ec"Jves Th• Orgafdi.uon Organtudon
surgery: But the practising manager has only too often £~It -the way the
,"'l ■donshlpe unlomi
barber must have felt. It .~ not that he, as a 'practical'.rnan', resisted
l11der type ol
theory. Most managers, especially in the larger companie$, have learned people eecnomy
thef hard way that performance depends upon proper.organization, But tut Economic
i:ompetftlon Erwt~r,,enr
the. practi~ing manager did not as a rule u_nderstand th'e organization rw■oun:irs
theorist, and vice versa. edm1n. sttucrure locaUon
' capaclty-
c:ontrol irystan •menll:1es
From Drucker-, The Pra~tlce oj Mahagement, ~954 .........isyotom ■hlrt,
Phy,1c11 Em,ironment
SJmm ■■ nd
poYll'et'struc!Ut9 sllUC:tUnle saf■ ty
trpeafpaop1e Job layout
nalu condition of
plant· ·
I.2 typeOI
teehnology
Figure I is a schematic .w ay of illustrating why the study of·organiz- nwma1•rlab . Ted\nologlcal
Environment
atiomil effectiveness is iikely to be complicatC9. Ovtr suety different rate of
exch•ffG•
variables are listed there. Most managers could suggest a few more or
would group them _differentlY:. Looking at this co~pl~ity one can Figure f Some Facrors effecring on.7anizar✓ona/ effec//veness

16 Understanding Organizations
one aspect of a much more complex situation. Toe'c~ns\Jltant firm that
links its prestige to dealing with one set of variables '(e'.g. systems and
structures), because th;it is where its operational iiXP,erience··lies, runs
the risk of doing a ~perlative job on an irrelevant issue. ):tis of-little use
regulating the clocks-when the house is burning down. .·
'Reductionism', as it is called, the ciisentangling of each variable in
tum, may suit some academics and analysts but will _.n ot do for. the
manager who has to put the lot together and make: it work. Beware
the manager who hawks-one patent cure. He has not:studied Figure x.
:2 'the utility of organizationa l ~heory
2.I
Analysis is an important.prere quisite of action. It is: no substitute for
action, and analysis without action or implementatiori remains mere
analysis and is often seen as irritating sophistry.' Or just as the centipede
-I'"
__, was reduce(J to lying on its back in"a ditch by pondering the question
'How do I use my legs?', so excessive management;ana1ysis can 1ead
to management paralysis. But action without analysis 'becomes mere
impi;lse. In fact, very little behaviour is purely impiilsive. Most indi-
vidu!lls, by the time they reach mahirity, have built up an array of
concepts which they use to interpret the data they 9bserve._ Many of
these concepts are not part of our conscious' awar~ness. Often they
1:9uli:1 more accurately be called beliefs, hunches or a~suinptions; some:.
times even myths, stereotypes and superstitions. : _
. Organization theory ~ee_ks t9 ~bstitute a coheren~ set of conceptual
frameworks f~r these collections of ass~inptions.; These concepts;
properly used and imdersto~-~• should: . . : .
Help one to explain th~ P!lSt which
in.tum
Helps one to understand the Present
and thus · we read. Fot many, those first organizations were schools or anni~,
To predict the Future which leads
to·
M:ore influence over future events
arid . . Such models, lurk.i9g in the unconscious, can be dangerous in tlie
.Less distul"bance from the Unexpected·.
About This Boole 17
:2.:2
Do not underrate the value of the conceptual understanding of the -
.present. One of the stereotyped assumptions.of our culture is that man
is master, or should be, of his environment. Wben anything goes
wrong, or goes in an unexpected direction, we are 'apt io blapie the
individual - ourselves or-someone else-; This tendency towards indi-
vidualism has, in my experience, caused a great deal of unnecessary
trauma and personal anxiety in organizations. In fact, as Figure I ·
demonstrates, the individual and his abilities are only one partofmany
forces bearing on a situation. A.. proper understanding of the relevant
concepts of organization theory. has brought much comfort to indi-
viduals -in tension.as well as allowing them to carry out the analytical
task of the manager, which is:
To identify the key variables in ~ny situation;
To predict the-probable outcomes of any c.hariges·in the variables;
To select the ones he can and should influence.
Even if this yields only lrnowledge of the negative, that it will tie useless
tp do such and such in such and such a situation, the manager will
benefit. For in o.rganizatiO[!S,· as in· life, we progress as much by
knowing what not to do as by recognizing what we ~ust do.
Box 1.2
"Ille centurion answered·and said ... "J say to this man, go· an4 he
. goeth, _and to another come and he cometh, and to my servant, do this
and he doeth it." • (Matthew 8:9)- ·
The centurion in the Bible was -explaining his organizational model. It~
wasone which worked for him in his time and place. He assumed that
it applied to everyone, everywhere.
We all of us carry around ·sonic organizational model in our mirids,
unstated, unformulated but very powerful none the less. We got it
from our first organizatioi;i, perhaps, or from the early books and films
or just the home. They shaped our ideas of authority, of what you
can- expect of other people, of bow close you can get to them and
how you behave. ·
wrong place. We need to under:itand the models in our mind.
 18 . Understanding Organizations
2.3
This; book contains_:
So~e of the conceptual frameworics"that i have foutid most"iiseful in
tlie foterpretation. of organizationai phenqmena; . - : : . . ., . .
A d(sc~ssiori of the~r application to particular types\at organiz~tional
pr<?oleµis . . .· . . . ·
. . .'
Thi~ book is eclectic. It is not a comprehensive revi~w of all· the-ideas
that have been put forward, though ideas for further study are sug-
gest_e d in Part Three. But it is a coherent set of con~pt:s;·The concepts
are interpretative devices, not precise definitions in the:tradition of the
physical sciences, Many of them will, and ·shouldi accord with the
intuitiv~ assumptions and beliefs of success£µ~ manage:rs. ·.
. I am reminde~ · of a stude1_1t on a management llevelopment pro-
gramme. He hai:l made half: a-inilliori-pounds by his av.in efforts by the
· time he was 35~ 'Why are you coming here as a stud~n~?' i asked him.
'With your success record y~u ·should join the fact)lty.' 'Not s~,' he
replied, 'I have come to fin!;l out why I was so successful.' He under-
stood that if he _could not explain his success he co4ld not repeat"it.
-1:a. . So it is with the interpretative devices of organizati,on theory. Organ-
oc
izatfons have. existed for thousands of yea.ts. Many .have succeeded.
Many .have fail_e d. The aim of organization theory. ~ to explain the·
difference. To conceptualize and understand ~hat )VOrks well so that
it can be repeated. To generalize from the particular !!-Dd to perceive
the common thread in the tangled skein of individual incidents~ If this
boo,C, therefore, can help the individual reader to re-interpret his own
experience so that be can better understand it and generali~e· ~om it,
then it will have achieved its ~m. To qistort Pope's dictum al;,out ·wit
Theory is Nature to ·advantage dressed,
What oft ·was th~ught, but ne'er so well e~p~essed.
i.4
_The theme of this book could be said to be that d(agnosis"liC?{at the
hea~t"of effective management. There are lucky managers; of course;
tho$e whose favourite remedy_just happens to be ippr9priate for the
· organizational malaise; those who find an organizati~n: in the blQom of
health and vitality when no pill can harm or help; those few who, by .
force of will and personality, drag a sick constitution:through to health.
Most of us, howe:ver, ~1;>uld,_do bc:;tter to rely on aµ accurate reading
About This Boole 19
of the _interpla~ of variables in Figure I. To do this w~ need under-
standing, or theories, of the way the variables affect each other. We
need to know those which we can alter and how by altering them we
sha_ll change the total situation. .
This book should help towards· that understanding. It will suggest
some linking mechanisms, some chaits for reading the signs of 9ifficulty
or success in organizations and for relating them to possible causes.
But although understanding helps the diagnosis, ·gives better predictive
abHity and more power to influence the future, it nevertheless remains
true that to understand all is not to resolve all. Diagnosis brings di-
lemmas. It is seldom possible to optim~ on all the .variables. What is
good for the organization is not always good for all its members. Not
all the variables are equally susceptible tQ change. 'Effectiveness' too
is an umbr~lla-word It leaves 'effectiveness for what or for whdm7'
unanswered, although _the nature of goals and· objectiycs feed~ back
into the set qf influencing factors (see Figure I again).
There is no theory that unlocks these dilemmas. Diagnosis clarifies
but seldom solves. This remains a question of judgem~-pt- the ultimate
justification _of .the manag(?rla_l rble. Do not look, therefore, in this
Box x.3 Diagnosis or functional myopia?
As director of a general management programme I was once in search
of a so-called multi-disciplinary problem which would" help the partici-
_pants to understand the- interlinking nature of the functional areas of
management. It ~eemeq to me that the recent much-publicized Cailure o[
a nationally known firm would provide a good example. I su"ested this
to my colleagues on the teaching staff of the programme:
'Excellent idea,' said the economist. 'a classic example of the failure to
forc~st a peaking of the demand curve.' ·
'Of course,' said the accountant, 'this organization has never understood
the concept of cash-flow - an excellent case-study.•·
'I should be delighted to be involved,' said the organization theorist, 'it
-only goes to show how inflexible a centralized organization can become.•
'U:s. a bit too obvious, that's· tho only troub_ic:,' said the marketing
man, 'with tbeir distribution ~stem an~ pricing policy disaster was in-
evitable.' · - .
If all were right, I wondered, could any one of them be.more right than
the others? · ·
 20 Understanding Organizations
book or in organization theory for detaile!l advice on :how to manage:
Lciok:rather for interpretative schemes to clarify your organizational
dilemmas. · ·
. .'
3 ~e nature and t'istory of organization ~~ory
The study of people in organizations is no new pheno~enon. Confucius
was an expert, so were the Greeks and all-civilizations who discovered
how to organize large numbers of people fruitfully. Aristotle had in-
sigh~ into organization·theory which should not be ignored.
· Jn. more modern· times. people have started·to think! about people in
orgarlizations more systematically .-It was, at first, fashionable to regard
orgaiµzations as· machines, machines with human :p~. Machines
coulq be designed, directed, controlled, spe"eded .up ~r'slowed down.
That :made them very convenient. ·They -could be.!'managed' by an
· outside agent. Indeed, much of the language of m~ageme~t was at
one time borrowe!l from engineering and, later,.frtjm' electrical and
.i,..
'Ci electronic engineering with its talk of interlocking syst"ems and feed-
back ·loops. It is a seductive language because it suggests that organiza-
tions are, or tari be, devices under our control whi~h .we.can use to
-impl~ment our wishes: · _
Although there are many managers today who still \µce to use this
language and would like to think that i~ works, th~ ~hinking about
organizations. lias moved on a long way from those eatly days. Looldng
back:now it is possible to distinguish seven schools i:>f thought, none
of which has prayed to be wh~lly '.'{rong, but none o;f 'Yhich is wholly
right. Like organizations themselves, the theory of tjrg·anizing started
out simple but got steadily more -coJnP.licated. Perh~ps it ~hould not
now .be called a theory a~ _all, · _ . · ·
The seven schools of tho~glit are: ,
I Scientific Management. Building on the pioneering siudies of F. W.
Taylor (see Box 1.4), a man who was, by all acciQunts, quite a
ch_aracter, this school set out to prescribe how org~njzation) should
work·. It pr~duced some simple-sounding injuncti~~ :- plan ah·ead,
co:unt things and movements, allocate tasks andresf>onsibilitjes;.limit
your .span of con~ol, review results. Commonsens~cal though it was,
it was a big step forward for the time .(1880s), but people hatl been
left out of the ,equation - ~ey were_not to be so dasily regimented,
. nor was the world outs.id~ so neat and stable as th~se_rules assumed.
About This Book . 21
Box 1.4 F. W. Taylor and Scientific Manageme1:1t .
F. W. Taylor, the father of Scientific: Management, ~as fascinated by
the inefficiencies of much of the manual work that .he observed. Most
famously he studied the work of pig-iron handlers, men who carried
heavy pieces of iron around the steel-works at the end of the last century.
He went on to look at the peop~e who s_hovelled coal in those steel-works
and marvelled, for instance, to discover that they used the same size of
shovel to lift ri~ coal at 3 ½ pounds to the shovel as they did for Massaba
Range coal at 38 pounds per shovel. He ~iscovcred by experiment with
the worlccrs that there ),Vas an optimum load of 2:z pounds per shovel
which would permit them to ~t the maximum tonnage each day. He
thc~eforc arranged for there to be a range of shovels of different sizes
adapted to the types of coal, The final result was that Bethlehem Steel,
where the experiments took place, w~re able to reduce their workforce
from 6oo to 140 and to pay the remaining 140 men 6o per ccn_t higher
wages provided that they met .their precisely calculated targets each
week. .
In bricklaying, he describes how an expert biicklayer, called Frank.
.. Gilbreth; was able;· after 18 months of careful·cxperiment, to show his
bricklayers how to lay a brick with five motio~ i~teed of eighteen by
such simple devices as building a platform to hold the bricks at a height
convenient to the bricklayer instead of placing .them on the ground.
(Gilbreth later developed his ideas into a full-scale classificatioQ. of all
possible movements, which be·called 'thcrbligs', his name spelt back-
wards). · · ·
It is obvious, really, and it was the beginning of time and motion study
and of industrial engineering. It is still true. Simple things can always be
·done.more simply.
Taylor, however," ijiadc the mistake of pressing his point too far. 'The
law is almost universal,' he said; •.•. that the inan who is fit to work at
any particular trade is unable to understand the science of that trade
without the kindly help and co-operation of !]lCD of a totaiiy differe_nt
education.'· That statemen't was an invitation to regard organizations as
systems to be devised_ by_ some to be ·worked by others. ·
Sec further: F. W. Taylor, Scientific Managermnt, 1947.
2 Human Relations: Chester .Barnard, a businessman who could
write oooks as well as think clearly about what he was doing,
"{as the first to insist that organiza~ions were not machines but
co-operative_communities. People had to be persuaded. Authority
really came from the people you led not from those a,bove. 'Plat
was in the 193os. Then came studies in productivity, notably at
· the Hawthorne plant of Western Electtjc, which showed how
 22. Understanding Organizations
• ~mportant the informal group was; and the he~rts and minds of
its people. . •· .· - ·: , ;, . . like economics, systems thinking explains everything but predicts
3 ~ureaucrati~. M~ Webe~_ wrote. 1:1~o~t bureauqra~ ·in G!!l'm~y
· 1n 1910 but 1t was .not until the 1940s that ~is w¢rk .was tra_nslated
a~d debate~ in America and the English-spe;iking. world.· ·His
description. and-appa:rent support for, bureaucracy as .a .necessary
part of organizing was not well-received. No dne, it see~, ap-
ptoves of bl,ireauc"iacy. except, . interestingly, lo~ of · people in
organizations who like to -know where• they stand, .what they have
to do, who is in charge and what the -rules. a~e.~We -should_ be
careful not to throw out all the concepts of l?m;eaucracy:, along
-with .its name; : ,· ·
4 P'ower, Conflict and Decisions. Philip Selzni"ck, stu<lying the
·. Tennessee V~iley A1,1thority in _the 1950s, reajized1tliat organiialio);is
· were rtot-as logical as·they seemed, even the supp.osedfy democratic
ones. Differeil~ parts.of them have different goals ian:d fight to secure
then:i. Power, its quantity and.its distribu~o_n. began to be studied,
as did conflict and the· way in which decisions !lre actually .made
iristead of the way they should be made. Simon lind Maich pointed
oµt that human beings were inevitably limited in jn(elligence, infor-
v, mation ~nd even i!} ti'.me. People did .nc;,t usually ·go for the best
0
possible soluti_on but for o~e that would just abou't do. Qrganiza-
ti'o ns, they suggested, could best be understood ~Y: looking at how
decisions are taken and ·by the way the organization- talks to itself,
its vocabulary. · . ! :
5 Technology. Joan ,...Woodward, in Britain, then ·. threw a!}other
spanner in th~· works, in the 1g6os,_ by p~inting ,ou.t that the
technology of tlie work you are doing ·makes 1:1- huge difference to
the type of organization you can use. As Burn~ ahd_ St_a_lk~r, 'also
nom Britain, suggested, routine oi: mechanistic .operations n~ed a
lot of bureaucracy whereas one-off products or. 'organic? work
arrangements need texi"iporary groups and deleg*ed r~sponsibility.
Lawrence and Lorsch extend~d this by adding i~ ~~ enyiroriment.
A stable envir9nment_needed_ a burea~cratic orgahization while a
· fast-changing one required a more flexible one to ~eal wiih it.
Obvious, as so often; with hindsight, but a shaft of in~ight af the
time. ' i · ·
6 Systems. It was all getting comj>l.icated. It was\· tempting tlien to
• 1 subscribe to opi:n systems t:1?eory. This theory· vjews organizations
as open s-ystehls which take in resources of_~U ~dr~, work.on them
and push them out, transformeo. In system$ t~inking" ·evecyth.ing
aliects evecyth'ing else. evecything.is part of SC?~e~hing bigger and
About.This Book· 23
nothing can stand on its own or be understood on _its _o wn. ·Rat?er
little, although writers like Peter Senge, ~uilding on Jay Forrester's
model-building in Industrial Dynamics, are helping to make it more
practically useful. _ .
7 Institutional. Meanwhile, the sociologists and the anthropologists of
_. organizations were beginning to insist .that each organization was a
unique bit of history, with its own goals, sitting in its own el\viron-
. ment, with its own ways of doing things and its .own pat-
terns of .-influence .. All the other schools of thought, therefore,
apply in so'me measure. Organizations are not naturally· co-
operative pla~~§, -they do need bureaucratic rules, but logic will
no~ necessarily prevail beciiuse different people sec things differ;
ently and have different priorities and, anyway, the technology
and the market-place mak·e some things impossible and some.
things essential even if you V?ished that they .weren't. ~Culture• .
became the fashionable word for .this school of thought, with its
implication that ·every organization had its own way of doing things
but with the implied corollary that their way was not necessarily
the best way .or the o~ly way.
All the schools of thought have co!}tributed something useful. It is wise
to be ecl~ctic, to pick from each anything that helps, to compile the
-sort of personal anthplogy whicli is what tliis book aims to be. :MY own·
biases show through if I group the many topics covered by the book
under_the !leadings of People, Power and Practicalities ~s in Figure 2.
Organizations are to me, first and foremost, fascinating collections of
people. The- challenge is to make them productive.and useful.communi-
ties. That requires the use·of power in its many guises, as well as an
understanding of the context of the organization, of its history and of
its purpose- the politics of the practical you might say, or the organiz-
ation as it really is. I call these the practicalities, because what is the
use pf all our understanding if we cannot-tum it into so_m ething prac-
tical and useful? ·
 About Th\s lfook 2.5
24 Understanding Organizations
should -not be blinkered in our thinking but pursue 'the injunction of
- metaphor'. There is no oqe right answer when you are dealing with ·
organizations. That may not seem -a comforting thought to some, but
I have always found it a liberating and an exciting one.-

Box 1.5
Fred Taylor did riot only measure pig-i~on carriers and coal shovellers,
lntar11roup relations he wo·utd, on bis cross-oouittry-walks, constantly experiment with his legs
to discover how to cover the greatest distance with a minimum use of
lypa oflnfluance
energy, or the easiest way to vault a fence, or the ideal length of a
age ·
walkiog stick. .
individual skUl,i leadership style obJectlves Rec(?unting this, Gareth Morgan explains that Taylor.grew- up in a
endebllitlu.
ownership well-to-do but puritan househ~ld which· emphasi7ed work, discipline,
history tidiness and the ability to keep one's emotions in check. Taylor's life was
dominated thereafter by the need for control, a man who wanted to
. rewards end punishment master every aspect of his life, even constructing a canvas that hung by
cdnlf<>I size two poles over his bed to keep his brain cool while he slept and so
· /systems strUc:N prevent nightmares.
He carried this personal obsession into his recipes ror organization,
• recipes which happened to meet the mood of the time and w~re, for many
v, -•°'"'"'" · techliblogy
. '":'"" years, very influential. We are all, in some way perhaps, the prisoners of
our past and our models of organizations just reflections of our child;
- psychologlcal .
contact ~ hood. There is no truth, only personality. It is a sobering thought for
any wol!ld-be theorist.
Figure 2 The relationship·between people, power a~£1 practicalities S1:e Morgan, Images of Organization, 1986

Gat~th ·Morgan, in a fascinating l,oo~, Images of drg~niztiti"oii, -t~kes

ano~her tack, suggesting that it is metaphor and a~alogy which gives
,us our understanding of organizations. He explores a range_of-different 4. How to use this book
metaphors, looking at: · · · ·

Organizations-as machines;· 4.1

Qrganizations as orga!)ism~;.
Organizations as brains; .
Part One contains a set of models, or frameworks, for the better under-
standing of people and organizations. I have selected six, the six which
Organizations cultures;
.as I have found most useful. Some of them, lik~ 'motivation' and 'leader-
Qrganizatfons as political systems;
Qrganizations as psychic prisons; · . ship', are topics common .to all boolcs on organization s. Others, like
'power and influence• and 'politics' are strangely rare. The ~meworks
Organizations as flux and transformation;
overlap. It is not possible to talk about leadership without talking about
Organizations as instruments of domination.
motivation,· or abQut politics wi~o~t men~oning groups. Different
The way you think, he e~phasizes, go~~ms the_ ytay you act. Make mode~, sets of concepts, can ~e used to describe the same phe~bmena.
sure, therefore, that you get your thinking straigh' first, and realize, This is as it should be. There-are different angles from which we view
always, thiit there is more than ·one 'J{ay of thinking about a problem. the world. The view will be slightly different from each, th~ truth will
Each metaphor, he suggests; is valuable because i(offer,; insight. We be a combination of all. .
55
 '\~~J!ifCi:;~::;t&Wt\f,'.\l~\\fMtI;~j'fi~~f,\f;.'\;',•>lii!);~.,i,:;;\,t;;Ji~~§~'~''''',,.,, -· . .
1r: r
:i'

d to our
Chapter 4 completed Section One, ,which introduced·.the concepts ~elate
· central theme, strategy...;. what it is,:how it should and does get made, and
the :Q.ature
begins with
.of the work of one of its key makers; the general manager. Section_ Two
Chapter 5 and deals ·with another ·set of concepts that every student
of general
ization,
management must com~ to u.nders.tancL We group these ·under the title Organ
0rgan izaticm ;-·.!---.--
because they all_pertain to th~__basic_desig11-aild-running-of~the--
-- ---TnChapter 5 we examine the design of organiZ8:tional6,struct ure and developme~t
e, the
of systems for coordination and control. In Chapter ·we ·consider cultur
-to-putsue-
ideological glue that holds organizatfons together, enhancing_theiLabilicy
other,mld-
~raregies on .one .hand, but some1im~sjmpeding-Strat~giG-Gbange-0ri-rhe-
it in its
power, how it flows within·-the organization and. how the organization ·uses
external environment.
s the
Structure, in our view, no more follows strategy than the left foot follow
. right ·in walking. The two exist interdependently, each influencing the
0th.er. There
y. But
are certainly times wh~n a structure is redesigned to carry out a new strateg
tials
the choice of any new strategy is similarly influenced by the realities and poten
(discus sed
of the existing structure~ Indeed, the classical model of strategy formulation
esses of
in Ch~pter 3) implicitly recogni?eS this by showing the st~engths and weakn
ths and ·
the organization as an input to the creation of str~tegies. Surely these streng
part and
weakn~sses ar~ deeply rooted within 'the existing structure, indeed are often
istrative
parcel of it. Hence we introduce here structure and the associated admin
we present'
systems as es~enticll factors to consider in the strategy process. Later, when
er the
the various co~texts within · which organizations function, we shall consid
different ways in which strategy and structure interact.

56
 ORGANIZATION

1:1e _first reading, excerpted originally from Mintzberg's. Th_e Structuring of

~rgan~zatio~, comprehensively probes the· design of orgamzati~nal structur~,
mclucling their formal systems. It seeks to do two things: first, to delineate the basic
dimensions of organizations and then to combine these to identify various basic
-types. o~-oi:gmations, called-'confrgo:r~':'""I'hecfiffi~nsfon~ introduced 1;1c1u~e
me7h~sms used to coordinate work in organizations, pararnet~rs to consider m
designmg structures and· situational factors which. influence choices among these
design parameters. This reading also introduces a somewhat novel diagram to depict
org~ations, not as the usual organizational chart or cybernetic flow process, but
as a visual combination of the critical parts of an organization. This reading then
clusters_ all these dimensions into a set of configurations, each introduced briefly here
and discussed at length in later chapters. In fact, the choice of the chapters on context
- entrepreneurial, mature, diversified, professional and innovative (leaving aside the.
last two on the international dimension and on strategic change) - was really based
?n five of these types, so that reading the conclusion to this article wiµ help to
mtroduce you to Section Three. .
Other forms of organization·, hardly new but having risen to great prpminence
recently, are 'allianc~• among various companies (wJ:iich may or may not be linked
by ownership ties). These have proved especially· powerful for competing across
·borde~ or in serving the varied demands of markets in very different parts of the
w~rld. Our second reading of this cµapter, called 'Collaborating to Compete',
reviews such alliances. The article is adapted from the recent book- of that title by
two McKinsey & Co. consultants'· Joel Bleeke and David Ernst, who sought . to•
~apture, the company's experiences with such activities. The old style of competition
1s out, they argue, replaced by a more collaborative style. And to succeed at it,
companies must arbitrage their skills, market access, and capitai, _and th~y must see
-~s as a flexible ~t.Q.J.!~Jl~..!!--.of..acti.ons _________________________ - ------
. . . .

TIIE 'STRUCTURING OF ORGANIZATIONS*

HENRY MINrzBERG
. .
The 'one best way' approach has dominate4 .our thinking .about .organizational.••
structure 'since the turn of'the· century. There is a right way and a wr:ong way to·
design an organization. A variety of failures, however, has made it clear that
organizations differ, that, for example, long-range planning systems .or organizational
development programs are good for some but not others. And so recent management
· theory has moved away from the 'one best way' approach, towards an 'it all depends'
. approach, formally known as 'contingency theory'. Structure should reflect the
organization's situation -· for example, its .age, size, type of production system, the
extent to which its environment is c?~plex_a1?:d ~ynamic:
* Excerpted originally from The Srructuring of Organizations (Prentice Hnll, 1979), with added sections from Power in
and Around Orgonl:otlons (Prentice Half, 1983). This chapter was rewritten _for this edition of the t~t, based on two
. other excerpts: •A typology of organizational structure', published ns Chapter 3 in Danny Miller and Peter Friesen,
Organl:ations: A qua111um v/e1r(PrcnticeHall, 1984) and 'Deriving configurations', Cbapter6inMlnrzbergon Management:
J'.1!ide Oµr Strong( World of Organizations (Free Press, 1989). · ·

57
 I
DEALING ',};ITH STRUCTURE~~ _SYSTEMS

-.h d not go . :·far

. .. .enough,
. .. th •·tall depends, approac oes. .. . .
:a
This readmg 8:1'gues that . e on the basis of a third approach; '3/h1ch 1;11ght
that structures are nghtfully design, , nfiguration' approach.·Spans. ~f contro~
be called the •~etti?g it all to&~the~i::tii~, planning systems_~~~- m.~t~]C:- ~~~c~ures.
types of formali~ation and d~cent~ de endently, the way a shopper picks_ ve~~t~bles
sh~uld not be picked and chosendmoti!'er elements of organizations.! design s~ould
at the market. Rather, these an . • . • ··
• · • ma1ly-consistent-groupmg · · •.
-logically-i:onfigure-m:ro-mLe . . f. h that has been done on orga.p.izational
When the eno~ous ~ount oth ~esear~lusion much of its confu~ion falls away,
structure is looked at m the_llght of dis con I confi' gurati' ons, which· are distin'ct 'in
· . · ·a t aroun severa
and a convergence_ is e~ en . . . hich they are found, arid even. m·the
.
their structural designs, m the situations tn w . . . . ...
th
periods of history in which e~firS
t
!:::
0
: : · must first. understand ciach of_the
To uhnderstankdththese PQq Accg:r~ingly' the first four sections of ~hese reading
elements t at ma e em u · ' ·h · ti
discuss the basic ·parts of organizations, the mechanism~ _by w~c orgamza ons
coordinate their activities the parameters they use to .design their structures, and
· their contingency, or situ;tional, factors. The final se~tion ~troduces the ~tru~tur~l
configurations, each of which will be dis_cus~ed_at leng~h mSe~t1on ~ree of tht~ _text.

SIX BASIC, PARTS OF THE ORGANIZATION.

At the base of any.organiz~tion can be.found-its operators,' those ~eople who perform
the basic work of producing th~ products. and rendering the services. They ~o~ the
operating· care. All but the simplest organizations· also require at least one full-time ·
manager, who occupies what we shall call the strategic apex, where the whole system
is overseen. And as the organization grows, more managers are needed :- not only
__,pana~s__o_f operators but a.ls.o.manage.rs_oLmanager.s.-A..middle-line-is--Greatecl,-a-
hierarchy of authority between the operating core and the strategic apex.
k, the organization becomes still more· complex, it generally requires another
group of people, whom we shall call the analysts. They, too, perform administrative
duties - to plan and control formallJ. theio.tk_oLo.thers.dmlof-a..different-nature,-
often labelled 'staff. These analysts fo~ what we shall call the techno-structure,
outside the hierarchy of line authority. Most organizations also·add staff units of ~ •
different
. kind, to provide
. various internal services, from a cafeteria or mailrooin.to
a legal ·counsel or ·p~~lic·1elations' o'ffice.' .We"•c·a11 'tbese uriits iind the ·p-~rt" o(the
organization they form the support staff. · ·
· · Finally, every ~ctive organization has a sixth part; which we call its ideology
· which is meant a strong 'culture'). Ideology encompasses the traditions and beliefs
(by
of an organization that distinguish it from other organizations and infuse a certain
life into the skeleton of its structure.
This give~ us six basic parts of an organiz~tio'n..As shown in Figur~ 1, we have
a small strategic apex connected by a flaring_ rni~dl~ line to a large, flat operating
core at the b~se: These three parts of ?1e orgamzation are drawn in one uninterrupted
sequen~e to mdicate that they are. typically connected through a single chain of formal
authonty. The technostructure and the su~port staff are ?hown off to either side to

58
?.?:..-4_ _ _o_R_GAN_IZ_P:._TI_ON___:__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

. (;."1;,~ .. ,!t'J•t• ~

Strategic
A~ex

~
6!
tf
;
\~i
, ~echnostructure Support ti
gf Staff
.
.

I.'\
'

FIGURE 1
The six basic parts of the organuation

'·

indicate that they are separ~te from this main line of authority, influencing the opening
·. -~or-e--only· indirectly;-'fhe· ideologyis.. shOWif anr1cmdof ha1i:qna"t-surrotii:ids -the· .
entire system. .
These_people, all of whom work inside the· organization to make its decisions
and take.lts_a.c.tions - f,,J)~time..emplo¥-ees...Qr.-in~eme--eases,eoffi1:11itted-volunteers-=--
-may-be-th0ught-of-as-irifluencers·who-forni-a-kind-ofinmnatcoalition:ByTois term,
we mean a system within whic~ people vie among themselve~ to determine the
.distribution of power. ·
In addition, various outside pe9P.le alsp try to exert influence on the organization, .
seeking to affect"ibe decisions a~d actions taken inside. These external influencers,
who create a field of forces around·the organization, can include owners, unions and
other employee as·sociations, suppliers, ciients, partners, competitors a~d all kinds of
publics, in the form of governments, special interest groups, and so forth. Together
they can all be thought to fonn an external coalition.·
Sometimes the external coalition is relatively passive (as in the typical behaviour
of the shareholders of a widely held corporation or the members of large union). a
Other times it is- dominated by one active influencer or some group of them acting
in concert (such as an outside owner of a business firm or a· community intent on ·
imposing a certain philosophy on its school system). And· in still other cases, the
external coalition may be divided, as different groups seek to impose contradictory
pressures on the organization (as in a prison buffeted between two community groups,
·one favouring custbdj, the other tehabilitation). · ·

59
 I
____ :__ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _-: :- -- '- -- -~
DEALING WITH STRUCTURE AND SYS
TEMS

AN!s¼
SJX BA_SIC COORDINATING _MEC!!
the making of pottery to the pla~ing of
a ~
Every organized human activity - from the
damental and opposing ~egu!rements:
man on the moon - gives rise to two fun ation of thos e
be performed and the coordin
division of labour into various ·tasks to ec r-
s to acco mpJisJUh.e_acti.vit.y.-Xhe-str-uG~ure-of-an-o.rganiza1ion can ~efin
task and
its labour is divided into distinct tasks
simply as the total of the ways in which
e tasks.
then its coordination achieved among thos
of
ation of work by the simple process
1. Mutual adjustment achieves coordin one
who do the work interact with
information communication.' The people
ts in the rapids adjust to one another's
another to coordinate, much as two canoeis
stment in tenns of ari arrow between two
' actions. Figure 2a shows mutual adju
ly used in the simplest or organizations·
operators. Mutual adjustment is obvious
Bu~ paradoxically, it is also. used
- ·it is the most obvious way _to coordinate.

O't ""( --)0

(al Mutual Adjustment Id) Standardization of Outputs

·-- ' ··•-"' •-· · ··--· ·- - --··· -

. --- -.
-·-· . --- ---
:_ . . A
~ ...,
~. 0
--- --! ~~ ~., ,..-
,.,: == =~~
/~: .,_ _-- ~- 1-- ...: __ --- --:
j __ _ _ _____
_.. " ~ ... ~~~--~
•

..::,,,...._ _. : , _

(b} Direct ?Upervision (el Standardization of Skills

/c)_S~andardization of Work If). Standard ization of Norms

FIGURE 2
The basic mechanis~ of coordination

60
 ORGANIZATION

in the most ~omplex, because it-is the only means that can be ,:elied upon under
extremely dtfficu]t circumstances, such as trying to figur~ out how to put a man
on the moon for the first time.
2
-~-:--•-...:;D=ir..~t;l~ftrvision in wbich one P.MS.QlLC_QQtdin.at.e.s...bJ.-giyjng_o~ders_t.CL.o.thers,-
.te~ds to come into play after a certain number of pe9ple must work together.
Thus, fifteen people in a war canoe cannot coordinate by mutual adju strnen~
th ey n~ed a leader who, by virtue of instructions, coordin~tes ·their work,
much
as a football team requires.a quarterback to ca11 the plays. Figure 2b shows
the leader as a manager witlJ. the instructions as arrows to the operators.

. Coordination can also be achieved by standardization - in effe~t, automatically,

.by vrr!ue of standards that predetennine what people do and so ensure t~at their
work ts coordinated. We can consider four forms - the standardization of the work
. proce·sse~ themselves, of the 'outp~ts of the work, of the knowledge and skills that
serv~. as mputs to the work,. or of the norms that .more generally guide the-work.

.3. Standardization of work pr~cesses means the · specification - that is, . the
pr~ gramming- of the content of the work directly, ~h~ procedures to be followed,
as m the case of the assembly instructions that come with many children's toys.
As s~own in Figure 2c, it is typically the job of the analysts to so programme
the work of different people in order to coordinate it tightly.
4. _. Standardization of outputs means the specificati~n not of what is to be done
. .but of its results. In that• way, the interfaces between jobs is predetermined, as
· . when a machinist is told to .drill holes in a certain place on a fender so that
·-·- - _._ ___·tlrey-wiiliit-theinYlts--behi-g--welded-by-some~11~-els-e;-ora:"divrs1n1rm1011fger-:ir
· tol~. fo achieve a sales gr_owtb of 10 per cent so that th~ corporation can meet
some. overall sales target Again, such standards generally· emanate from the
- ~ - .~n~1¥.Sts~s..sh.ow.n-iR-Eigur.e.1d · ·
·--5.' Standardzzatzon oj skills,' as ~ell .as._ knowl~dg~, 1~ a~~iher, thougliloo~er way
to achieve coordination. Here, if is the worker rather than the work or the
outputs that is standardized. He or she is taught a body of knowledge and_a·
set of .skills which are subsequ·ently applied .to.tlie work.. S~ch standardization
typically takes place outside the organization - for example, in a professional
school of a university before the worker takes his or her first job - indicated
'in Figure 2e. In effect, th~ standards do not come from the analys~ they are
internalized by the -operator as inputs to the job he or she takes. Coordination
is .then achieved by virtue of various operators' having learned what to _expect
of each other. When an anaestµetist and a surgeon meet in the operating theatre
to remove an appendix, they need hardly communicate (that is, use mutual
adjustment, let alone direct supervision); each knows exactly what the other
.will do and can coordinate accordingly.
6. Standardization ofnorms ·means that the workers share a common set of beliefs
and -can achieve coordination based on it, as implied in Figure 2f. For example,
·if every member of areligious order shares a belief in.the importance of attracting
converts, then alf will work together to achieve this aim.

61

L
 STEtvIS
G WITH STRUCTURE AND SY
DEALLL'\J
of
id ered the m os t basic elements
h
na tin g m ec hani sms ca.n be cons er. They seem to fa11 into a roug
These coordi holds organizatio
ns togeth
, the favoured mea ) to
ns o f ·.
e, the gl ue th at e co m pl ic ated
structur es mor hanism
der: A s or ga ni za tional work becom ual adjustment (the simplest mec nonns, .
or to· shift from mut work P,rocesses
or
dina tio n se em s preferab ly of no
coor
rv isio n, th en to standardization, ba ck to m ut ua l adjustment. But -:-
direct supe reverting 1I-wiU-typica11y-
be-found
ise of ou tp ut s or of skills, finally se-m echa ni srns ;-a
otherw ·one--of-tJ10 ·
rg anizat m n-ca n- -re1yim·-a·-single· n. . · . .
v~ ur_one
-u
re ason ab ly deve loped ·organizatio is that many organization~ do fa ations
in every ~
t point for us here es. In fact, orgam
Still, the importan , at least at certain stages of their liv simply because of the
e others politicized,
mechanism over th m ost" prone to becoming r influence in a relative vacuum
se ~m
that favour. none y arise when people have to vie fo
conflicts that natu
ra1I
· .
of power. .
~
IAL .PARAMETERS OF DESlG
THE ESSENT
eters
an ip ul at io n· of a series of param o f
ganizational desi
gn is the m
ent of coordinati
on. Some
The essence of or sion of labour an
d th e ac hi ev em
sign of the superstr gn
ucture
term in e th e di yi ns , ot he rs th e de
that de
n th e de si gn o f individual positio ni za tio na l ch ar t), some the desi
these concer in the or ga
fsubunits, refJ.ected rstructure, and a final group conc are the ·
erns the
ov er all ne tw or k ?
(the
to fi~sh out that
supe follows
of lateral linkages- ga nization. Listed ·as
de ci si on -m ak in g system of the or
e co or di na ti ng mechanisms. ·
design of the links to .th
~ eter s o f st ru ctural desi~, with
· mai~ para e wo~k '
r o f ~a sks in a given job and th tba:_rj:
ation refers to th
e numbe e extent
~ · Job specializ ly specialized. to · th
sk s. A job is ho ri zo nt al
iaJi ze d ·to the extent ·
control over th es e
.L.g
.~J;P_QQIDQ?~~§ cks control of
__
ta
J~ ~l!.~ !I ~ de
the nn ed .tasks, vertic Unsk
tasks .performed ·
al !~
'l' d·
SR ec
1 ,e Jo s ar
b - :-e- --
ty
.- -· -·ly
p ic al
ly
-· ·

or ke r .la . . - of es si on al .jobs are typical

that l the w ·ar d · b pr
high

z:t::a~ta:~
.~- s~~ z!e .m
~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ 1 ·:;:~~~~e~~'
~th d1mens~ons;
skilled or
refers t~ t~e enla
rgement

~~~b/: bo~;: n re fers to the standa.

.r di za tio
~
-
.f
.w
-~ . .
or process~s by
. .
the
rm al iz at io n
fo
._fJ ~~har;iour erating instructions . b d .
r~guJ~tions, and
the like.
op le s,
unpo s1 ao n of
at t~ Iy _~1
_ :l ~~ y _f of
orm ;fa:da;~ ~ :::~ o
~
ns,
f~
ru
r ~o ~~ di ~~ ~! on -~ -~~ _be de..fi..ne. d
_Stf.!!.~f~~e~_
au cr
th
atic , th os e th at do . · not as· ·or:gam.e.. ·· • .
as bure .
rs to th e us e of fo rmal instruct' nal prqgrammes to .establish and
e Tr~inie.nfmrepefeople the. requisite ski11s and mkn~wledge to do particular jobs
~tandar~1z desig . all nal
~rga m zatw ns . Training is a key n pa ra meter mall work we c professiotion.
m 1· . IIy s·ubst'
Training and Iiorma ization are basicabehaviout~tes ~or achievi~g the e learned. as
~tandardiza
. aucratization) of rds ar
(~lleff:ct, the bure se d on th . b. n one, the standa .
they are impo e JO as rules.
s . s, m the other .
re fe rs to pr og an d te ch ni qu es b h. the norms of the
Indoctrina tio n r~mrn es h y w zc h
• . ed onsive
members of ~n orgamzation are standardiz { s~ ~ at th ey become resp d
to ·t 'd needs and can
thereby be its decisions an
I s 1 eological ruse . to mak_e

62
li•:3'8·· ___ ___
ORGANIZATION _ __!__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

..
..,.:
take its actions. 1ndoctrination. too is a substi.tute for formalization, as well as
for skill training, in this case the standards being internalized as deeply rooted
· beliefs. · ·
--., Unzi grouping refeITTTihe""'thuit-e-af1lre-bme-s-by'Which-p·o-sitions-are-grouped-
togetber into units, and those units into higber'.'order units (typicall! sho;1'n on
?ie organization chart). Grouping encourages coo!dination by putting different
Jobs under common supervision, by requiring. them to share common res~~rces
and achieve common measures of performance, and by using proximity to facilitate
mu~ual adjustment among them. The :various bases for grouping - by work process,
product, client, place, and so on - can be reduced io two fundamental ~mes - the
function performed and the market served. The former (illustrated in Figure ~) refers
to means, that is to a single link in the chain of processes by which products or
services are produced, the latter (in Figure 4) to ends, that is, the whole chain fox:
specific end-products, services, or markets. On what criteria should the choice of a
b3:5is for grouping be made? First there is the consideration of workflow linkages,
~r 'interdependencies'. Obviously,'the m6re tightly ·linked are po'sitions ·or units in
~he workflow, the more desirable that tli~y be ·grouped together to facilitate their
coordination. Second, there is the consideration of process interdependencies - for
example, across people doing th~ same kind of work but in different workflows (such
as maintenance men working on different machines). It sometimes make sense ·to
group them together to facilitate their sharing of equipment or ideas, to encourage the
improvement of their skills, and so on. Third is the question of scale interdepen-
dencies. For example, all maintenance people in a factory may have to be grouped
together because no single department has enough maintenance WOFk for one person.
Finally, there are the social interdependencies; the need t~ group people together for
·-social·-re~ons,as--in- ~oal-mines-wher-e-mutual-.suppor.:t-under-dangero.~s-working___
conditions can be a factor in deciding_ how to group people_.. Clearly, grouping by
functions is favoured by process and scale interdependencies, and to a lesser extent
_b.y__so_cfa,j interdependencies (in the sense that people who do the same kind of job ·
-often-teild-to:.get-along-better-).-<Ir-ouping-by-function-also-encourages_specialization,_
for example, by al1owing specialists to come together under the supervision ·or one
of their own kind'. The problem with functional grouping, however, is that it narrow
perspectives, encouraging ·a focus on· means .instead of ends - the way to do the job
instead of the ·reaso-n for doing·the job in· the :first' place. Thus grouping ~y market .
is used to favour coordination in the workflow at the expense of process and scale
specialization. In general, market grouping reduces the ability to do specialized or
repetitive tasks well and is more wasteful, bei.q.g less . able to take advantage of
economies of scale and often requiring 'the duplication of resources. But it enables the
organization to accomplish a wider variety . of tasks and to change its tasks
more easily to serve the organization's end-markets. And so if. the workflow
interdependencies are ·the important ones and if the organization cannot easily
handle them by standardization, then it will tend to favour the market bases
for ·grouping in order to encourage mutual adjustment and direct supervision.
But if the workflow is irregular (as in .a Job shop'), if standardization can easily
contain the important workflow interdependencies, o~ if the ·process or scale
interdependencies are tte. important ones; then the organization will be inclined
to seek the advantages of specialization and group on the basis of function

63
 DEALING "WITH STRUCTu"RE AND SYSTEMS

Board of Directors

Director General

~==J:;=;=±=:,~-=-Pu~~bl~i-c=-::,1-r=-=-:Lc:..=-,l~a;ln;teilance
Finance .
Operations Relations Box Office and Garage

FIGURE 3
Grouping by function: a cultural ce~tre

Deputy
Postmaster
General
l
l I
Atlantic Quebec Ontario Western
. ' Postal · Postal· Postal Postal
Region Region Region Reglon
General General General General
Manager Manager Manager Manager
I
I I
Montreal
I
,Toronto South·
I -
-
Nova New- Metro. /Ilea Quebec Central Metro.Area Western Manitoba
Scotia foundland Proc. Plant East Ontario Alberta
Postal Postal· Postal Postal Proc. Plant Ontario Postal Postal .
Postal Postal Postal District Distritt
District District District District · District District -District
Director Director Director Dlrector Director Director Director Director Director

_ N~'-!_ . ___ •.. - -·- '-0uebec-

IDmisw,cl(
& P.E.I.
• • West ·
Postal
. . : ·-easWrn -
Ontario
. .
Wciffiiem ..... -
Ontario chewan
--
···--·· - ··saskat: -- ·eiifuh•
Columtil

-
.District,
Pps~l District Postal . Postal. Postal Postal,
Distrlct District District Distrl(J
Director Director Direc~or Director Director I Directo'~
. ' ~
'Headqaarterstaff ~ roOp·s1Jela-tea

FIGURE 4
Grouping by market: The Candian Post Offic_e .
. . . ' .. . .,. .. . ..

instead.· Of course, ·in all but the smallest organizations, the question is not so
much which basis of grouping, but in what order. Much as fires are built by
stacking logs first one way and then the other, so too are .organizations built
by -varying the different bases for gr.ouping ·to take care of various interdepen-
dencies. · ·

@ Unit size refers to the number of positions (or units) contained in a single unit.
The equivalent ·term, ·span of control, is not used here, because sometimes units
are kept small despite an absence of close supervisory control. For example,
when experts coordinate extensively by mutual adjustmenti a~ in an engineering

6-l
~
~---~- --!.____ ___:_____ ____
ORGANIZATION

·· · a space agency, they will for~ into small units. In th'1.s case' unit. ion
t.earn m size
is small and span of c·ontrol is low despite a relative absence of direct supei:vis . .
In contrast, when work is highly standardized (because of either formal1zaJ1on
. .
t . . ) U_?.:t
~a~!11g,
. Iittl need for direct
s1~e can be .very large, because_the!_e~--~--- -~--.. ---r
superv~s16n.one Toreman·caiisupernse·dozen.s'-of assemblers, because they wor
accordmg to very tight instructions.
0 Planning and control sy~tems are use~ to standardize outputs. They may be
d_ivided into two types: action planning systems, which specify th~ resul~ of
s~ecifi~ actions before they are taken (for example, that holes sh~uld .be drill~d
w1th d1~meters of 3 centimetres): and performance control systems, which specify
the desired results of whole raµges of actions after the fact (for example, that
sales of a division should grow by 10 per cent in ~ given year).
e .Liaison dev_ices refe~ to a ~hole series of mechanisms used to encourage mutual
adju~tment within' and between uni~. Four are of particular importance:
- Liaison positions are jobs created to coordinate the work of two units d!rec~ly,
without having to pass through man~gerial channels, for example, the purchasing
engineer who sits between purchasing and engineering or the ?ales liaison person
who mediate~ between the sales· force and tlie factory. These positions carry no
form~l authority per se; rather, those who serve in them must use their powers
of persuasiop,· negotiation, and ~s 0 on to bripg the two sides together. .
Task forces and ;'landing. co~nmittees are institutionalized forms .of meetings,
.which bring members of a number of different units together on a ~ore inten~ve
basis,·in the first case to deal with ·a temporary issue: in the second, in a more
permanent and regular way t~ discuss issues of common interest. · ·
- /ntegr-ating-managers•-,-•essenti~y--liaison,-personnel-with..:.fonn·~--auth-ority ·=: · ·
provide for stronger coordination. These •m~agers' are given auth9rity not
over the units they link,. but over something impo:i:tant to those units, for
example, their bu~gets One~.xaJ;npieJs..thc..b.rand.manage$.a..c.onsnmer..go.acls_
-fir-m..:...wbo-is-responsible-for.:..a-Ger-tafo..:product-but-who-must..:..negotia-te-its-:_
production and marketing with different 'functional departments .
. Matrix structur~ carries liaison ·to· its natural conclusion. No matter what _the·
_l;i~ses:pf.grpup,i.ng al one level in an organization,.some.interdependencies always
remain. Figure 5 suggests various ways to deal with these 'residual interdepen-
dencies': a different type of grouping can be used at the next level in the hierarchy;
· staff units •can be formed next to line units to advise on the problems; or one
of the liaison devices already discussed c·an· be overlaid on the grouping. But
in each case, one basis of grouping is favoured over the others. The concept of
matrix structure is balance between the two (or more) bases of grouping, for
example functional _with market '(or for that matter, one kind of market with
another - say, regional with product). This is done by the creation of a dual
authority structure - two (or ·more) managers, units_ or individµals are made
jointly apd equally responsible for the same decisions. We can distinguish a
permanent form· of matrix structure, where the units and the people in them
remain more or less in place, as shown in the example of a whimsical
muitinationai firm in Figure ·6, and ashifting· form, suited ·to project work . '
.

65
 I
-------~c.....--~D:::EA.:L=IN.:..:G:_W~l:.:..:TH:_:_.::_STR=-=-
· ...::.u_cru_RE_AN_D_SY_STE_M_s_ _ _ ~

(bl Urie and Staff Structure

(a) Hierarchical Structure ·

-,I.
II . II ____ _I II •
, __. -------- . -- ·-- ---l
(cl Liaison Overlay Structure
(d) Matrix Structure
··(e.g. Task-~orce)

FIGURES
.Structures to deal with residual i:n,terdependeocies

--r ·-P·r~sici~nt- I ----·------- -.··- ..-· ---·-·"

..
I I ·I I

- -Vice•Presiden~ - -Vrce,-Pre-sitlerrr -. v'ice=Prestdem - v'ice-President

Frostbite Remedies Snowblowers Canada Tahiti ·

'-- General Manager ,_

Canadian Snowblowers -

I I
j Engineering ·l / Manufacturing I Marketing
I
FIGURE 6
A permanent matrix structure in an international firm
 :
I Execut!ve I
I
I
fPro~ramme tHf1ce1
I Staff
Executive
IProgramme CoorQinato_rs I Committee Service

Camera Satellite
Propulsion Tracking Design
Construction

~ Project 1. ----- ---------- ---------------------- '

--1 l>roject 2 ----- ---------- ---------- -----------

7 Project 3 ----- ---------- ----------· -----------
'Project 4 · ----- ---------- ----------- -----------
FIGURE. 7 . .
Shifting ma~ structure in the NASA weather satellite programme
Source: M(?dified from Delb~cq.an.d Filley (1~74: 16) .

. "
where ~he units and the people in them move around frequently. Shifting matrix
·structures are common in high-technology industries, whic.h_gc.o.up..specialists-
1n functional aepartme.ntsJo.r.h9use¥eeping.pur.poses-(pFocess-interdepenaencies,
etc.) but deploy them from various departments in project teams to do the work,
as shown for ~ASA in Figure 7. · ·
8. Decentralization ·refei;-$ to the diffusion of decision-making power. When all·the
power rests .at ~- single point in an
organization, we call its structure centralized;
to the extent that the power is dispersed among many individuals, we call it ·
relatively decentralized. We can distinguish vertical decent,:ali:iation - the delegation
of formal power down the•bierarchy to line managers-from horizontal decentralization
· - the extent to which formal or informal power is dispersed out of the line hierarchy
to non-managers (operators, analysts and support staffers). We can also distinguish
selective decentralization - the dispersal of p,ower over different decisions to djfferent
places in the organization - from parallel decentralization - where the power over
various kinds of 4ecisions is delegated to t~e same place. Six forms of decentralization
may thµs be described: (1) vertical and horizontal centralization, where all the power
rests at the strategic apex; (2) limited horizontal decentralization (selective), where
the strategic apex shares so'me power with tjle technostructure· that standardizes
everybody e!se~s work; t3) limited vertical decentralization (parallel), where managers

67
 CTURE AND SYSTEMS
DEALING WITH STRU --~··- - - - -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___:.·- - - - · t of the decisions
- ontrol mos ·. .t
d the power to c . rzation where mos
of market-based units are delega~e 1and horizontal deccehntratiucture: (5) selective ·
. h. . ,
·ts· (4) vert1ca re at the bottom oft es r different .. .
. concermng t eir 1me um • .
of the power rests in the operatl~~ :t~o~ dec1s1ons
where the power 0 ~~r agers staff experts
~er~cal and horizo_ntal decent~~ i;he o;ganization, amo~g m:n hiera~chy; and (6)
is dispersed to vanous pla~es teams at various levels m th ll by7dtin-mrbers--
and operators who work m· , --.d7nore or-I~• Y-
= ~ l i - power is Sllan:u
pufeclecenfral1zauon! W ere .
of the organiz~tion.
THE SITUATIONAL FACTo~s
·. • ~
. ' . fluence the choice of these. desi~
A number of 'contingency' or 'situational factors m d .. e of the organization; its
Parameters, and vice versa. •They include the ~ge. ati~ s s01fz 1'ts environment, such as
· ·
technical system of producaon: vano~s c
· £ cx mple whether or not 1t IS
baractens
5 st
stability and complexity;:an~ its power Y emf t{: e~e:ts of these factors, as foun~ ·
O
tightly c;ontrolled by outside influencers. Some • d below as hypotbe.sesr .
. body of researc h 1·1terature,. are summarize. · . .
· in .an extensive .. . .

Age and Size .

. organization, the. more fiorma1·ized I't s behaviour· What we have
o. : The older an . . · he tend ·
here is the 'we've-seen-if-all-before' syndrom_e. As o~gamzations ~ge_, t Y
to. repeat their beh~viours: as a result, these become more p~ed1ctable . and so
more amenable to formalization. . · .
& · The larger ·an organizati~n. the more forma{ized its behaviour:_ Ju~t as the ol_der
.. organization formalizes what it bas seen before, so the larger orga~tlon formalizes
__what it sees often. ('.Listen mistert I've bear<Lthat stQ!Y_ at 1~~~.P:Y~_ti_mes_t2~?::>::..~.1.:1-~~--
:fill in the form like it says:') ·
. ~ . The larger an 'organization, the _more elaborate its struc,ture; that is, the more
'-specialized.its~abs..1112d...il11iJ.s.J1ncL1heJ11.or..LJiene1Dp.edJts""adr.ni.rJ.isJr.aJ.iv.LJ:D.11Jp.JJJJ.en/.J:_
7'.-s-organiza:tions--grow-in-sjze,theY:,-are-able-to-specialize-their-;iobs-inere-:finely.;-.
(The big barbershop can afford a specialist to cut .children's hair; the small
one cannot.)' As· a result, they can also specialize - o·r 'differentiate' - the ·work
of their units more extensively. This r~quires more effort at coordination. And
s~· the larger .orga~ization .tend·s ·also .to; enlarge its ;·hierarchy .to effect· direct .
supervision and to make greater use of its 'technostructure to achieve coordin~tion
by standardization, or else to encour~ge more coordination .by mutual adjus~ent·.
G . 'the larger the _organization, the_ larger th: size of ~ts average unit: This finding
relates to · the previous two, ~he size of u~1ts growmg ~arger as organizations
themselves grow larger because (1) as behaviour becomes more fo r d d
(2) as the work of each unit- becomes more homogeneous, managers rm.a ize ' abnl.e
. · are a
to supervise more employees.
$ Structure reflects the age of the industry from its fiound· . Th' • .
. b h hall mg. 1s 1s a cunous
. .
:findmg, ut one t at we s see holds up remarkably 11 An
. we •. orgaruzation's

68
►
;ORGANIZATION
,.,. .

:;i~~ct~re seems to_reflect the age of th~ industry in whic~ it operat~; no matter
.-~h_a t 1ts own age. Industries that pre-date the industnal rev~lut10n seem to.
/~~our one kind of structure, those of the age of the earl~ rai~roads ano!her~
~ nd ·:.SO- on. We-Should-.obviously-ex.pecLdiffer.ent-str.uctures-l-n-.differ.ent-pei:ods,-
.t~e· ~urprlsing thing is that these structures seem to carry through to n~w penods,
ol~ ~ndustries remaining relatively true to earlier structures. · .

.Technical System
Technical system refers to the instruments used i:q. the ~perating core to produce the
outputs. (This should be distinguished from 'technology', which refers to the knowledge
base of~ organization.) · ·

O The more regulating the technical system - that is, the more it controls the work
of the operators - the more formalized the operating work. a!"d the more bureaucratic
tire structure of the operaiing core: Technical systems that regulate the work _of the
operators - for example, mass production assembly lines - render that work highly
~outine and predictable, and so encourage its specialization and formalization, which
m turn create the conditions for bu~eaucrac~ in the operating core. _ ._
• The more complex the -technical system, the more elaborate and professional the
.support staff: Essentially, if an · organization is to use complex machi~ery, it
must hire staff experts who ·can understand that -machinery - who have- the
capability to de~ign, select and modify it. ·And ·then it m~st give them conside!able
power to make decisions concerning that machinery and encourage them to
use the liais"on devices 'to ensure mutual adjustment among them.
o The au_tomation of the operati~g core transforms a bur~aucrati~ administ;~tive
structure into an organic one: When unskilled work is coordinated by the standardization ·
.of work processes, we tend to get bureaucratic structure throughout the organization,·
because a control mentahty pervaoeITl:iFWliote system. Bufwhenlli_e work oflne
. operating core becomes automated, social relationships tend to change. Now it is
machines, ~ot people, that are ·regulated. So the obsession with control tends to
disappear :.. . machines do not need to be watched over· - and with it go many of the
-managers--and analysts who were needed to control the operators. In their place come
the support specialists to loqk after the machinery, coordinating their own work by
mutual adjustment. Thus, automation reduces line·authority in favour of staff expertise
and reduces the tendency to rely on standardization for coordination.

Environment

Environmen~ refers to various characteristics <?f the organization's. outside context,

related to markets, political climate, economic conditions, and -so on.

e The more dynamic an organization's environment, the more organic iis structure:
It stands · to reason that in a stable e~vironment - where_nothing changes - an
organization can predict its future conditions and so, all other things being
equal, can easily rely on standardization for coordination. But when conditions

69
 DEALING WITH STRUCTURE AND Sy .
. ' ' ~~~-
. . · d t change is frequent, labour t
. r pro uc . f10n cannot sta Urn.ove
· he need 1or the organ1za nd
~ec~me dynam!c. - whendittions are unstableth; use of direct supervision or ardi~:
· 1s high and poht1cal co? flexible thro_ugh e a more organic structure 1'hlllutua1
5
ou~ ·must instead re;a.i~ion, and so it mu l u:ucratic institutions in peac~ti Us, for
adJustment fo_r coo~ i:atend to be hig~Iyh~ui~y dynamic, guerilla-type Warfame, can
example, armies, w ~ engaged 1n -:!_- . _ re.
become rather organic~ ~- --=--:---; vironmenl, •thehmore11 decent~ ·~ [
. ·1at1on s en • l,e<J ·'
·e The more· complex an o,ganz~ tralize a structure is t at a , the lnforinar lt,r
structure: The prime reason to det~e comprehended in• one head. Thus, wIon
needed to make decisions _can~o based on a comple~ bodr of know1 hen
the: operations .of an or-gan1zatio\aredecision-making power. Note that a std&e,
there is usually a need to decentra iz~ (the manufacturer of dresses faces a s·lllp}e
· · l · dynamic one season to another,) as can a cornltnpIe
environment can be stab e 0~ efrom
environment yet cam~ot predict styl h •rt surgery faces a comple~ task, yet knPle~ 0
·one {the specialist in perfected open: ea · . ws
what to expect). . . . ·
· · ,, .· ,·on's markets, the greater th~ propensity to snt .
.i• ;1; d organra 1
favourable
·
economies of scale· ni !I
o T,ze more ,aversy,e an .. : - .
it into market-based units, or dwzswns_ , ~zven . · h' • . · . ,r ~en
.. ·. ·. . ·.d ·r· d·-. t'nct markets - geograp ica1 regions, cltents bUt.
an orgamzat1on can 1 enti Y 1s 1 • ,. • If• . '
. d d • s 1·t will be predisposed to sp!It itse mto high•leVe1
espc1a11y pro ucts an service - 1 . 0
units.on that basis, and to give each a good _deal ~f ~ontr~ ·o~er, its ow~ ,Perations
(that is, to use what we called 'li~~ted v~rt1c~J ~ecent~ahza~on ), In s1~ple tenns,
diversification breeds divisionalizat1on. Each unit can be given all the function
associated whh its own markets. But thi~ assumes favourable ~c~nomies o~ scale: ;
the operating core cannot be. diyided, as m th~ case of~ alumm1~rn smelter, ~Iso if
some criti~l fui:iction must.be centra1ly coordmated, as m purchasmg a retail. chain
then full divisionalization may not be possible. . · · '
_ -~-_ Extreme _hostility in .its en~ironme~t d;ives . any_ organizatio~_.!P_E~ntralize its
structure temporar~ly: W~~~ t?rea~e~ed by ext~eme hostil~ty in its environment;"
_the !ende~cy- ~or an 9rgan~ati?n 1s to · ce?traltze power, m other words, to fall
back on its .tightest coordmatmg mechanism, direct supervision. Here. a. sing!~
leader. ca_n ensure fast andt1gh1ly coor~foated. response to thTilireat •tarleasr
temporarily). \Gl. s

Power

e The greater the external control of · . .

: formalized its structure: This . im ortanthorgamz~tcon, ~he more centralized and
that an organization is controlled extemalpotheSIS claims that to the extent
a government that dominates its ext 1 Y,. ~or ex~mple · by a parent finn or
at the strategic apex and to forma/rn~ ~oahtt~n - it tends to centralize power
most effective ways to control an tze it~ :haviour. The reason is that the two ·
.f . organization fr th . .
chie executive officer responsible fi • , om e outside are to hold its
standards on it. Moreover exte olr its actions and to impose clearly defined
~
· care1W , rna control fiorces the the organization to· be
especia• 11Y about its actions,

• .
A divided external coalition will ten d to gzve
·
r'
.
zse to apoliticiz.ed internal coalition,
.

70
~ ···•·...:?!~~IZATION
.
versa·· In effiec.t, confl'1ct in one of. .the . 1· . d t ill v r to
and·· vice
•·' th. h coa 1tlons ten s o sp o e
~ · ~.ot ·er, as one set of influencers seeks to enlist the support of the others.
;/~!: .- \·_F_ashion favours the structure of the day (and of the.culture), sometimes even
;j:-l~~-_znappropriate;'-fdeaUy;··the-desig n-parameters--are·-chosen--according- 'to-tlr e-
er, fashion
..,)f.~~t~s of age, size, technical system and· environment. In fact, howev
tly
;~~~m~ to pl~y a role too, encouraging many organizations to adopt curren
-_rctuar design parameters that ~re inappropriate for .themselves._ Paris has
its offices of 'haute structu
its
re',
sa ?ns of ~aute couture; likewise New York has
ral fashion.
the c~nsulting_firms that sometimes tend to oversell the latest in structu

#tE :coNFIGURATIONS
We hav~ now in_trodi.Iced various attributes of organizations ~ parts,.
coo~dinating
mecb ~sms , ~~s1g~ par~e ters, situational factors . How ,4o th~Y _i;t\l
c9mbµie? .
We proceed here on the .assu~ptii;i{·that a limited numb ir of configurations
uced in
can help explain much of what is observed in organizations. We have introd
coordination,
our discus~~on six. basic parts of the organization, six basic mec~anisms of
as well as six basic types of decentralization. In fact, there seems to be a fundamental
a set of pulls
correspondence between ail of thse sixes, which can be explained by
_ 8._When
exert~~ on the organization by each of its •six parts, as shown in Figure
ization becomes
conditions favour one of these pulls, 'the associated part of the organ
key, the coo;I"dinating mechanism appropriate to itself becomes prime
, and the form
The organ ization is thus_ drawn
of decentralization that passes power to itself emerges.
a ce briefly
to design itself as particular connguration. We list here and then-introd~ rwlreli-··~
.-pp-ea
._:the-six-Tesu1ting-con:fignrations; -together -with-a:--seve.rith-th1rt'""temis-ttn ·
.·no one pull or ~art dominates. ·

__The.Entt~pi:eneuriaLOr:ganization~
. . ..

simple, not
The name tells it all. And the ~gure above sh~ws it all. The structure is
of whom
much more than one large unit consisting of one or a few top managers, one
the basic work.
dominates by the pull to lead., and a group of operators. who do
is made of
Little of the behaviour in the organization is formalized and minimal use
ion means that
planning, training or the liaison devices. The absence of standardizat
there ·are a few
the structure is organic and has little need for staff analysts. Likewise
d afthe top.
middle-line-managers because so much of the coordination is handle
r~ lean, the
Even th~ support st~ff is miµimized, in, o:i;der. to keep th~ .~tructu
orga.niz~tion flexible.

71
 DEALING WITH STRUCTURE AND SYSTEMS
1

Pull to Professionalize

Ideology: P~lling Together

Politics: P"ulling Apart

FlGURE 8
. Basic pulls on the organization
... .____

Prime
Coordinating Key Part of Type of
Configuration Mechanism . Organization Decentralization
-
- Entrepreneunal ·Direct Strategic apex verttca1 ana
organization supervi_sion · horizontal
centralization
_Mach_ine . . . Standardization .. . . . cture
. Technostru .. Limited
organization of work horizontal
processes decentralization
Professional Standardization ·Operating core ·Horizontal
organization of skills decentralization
Diversified Standardization Middle line Limited vertical
organization of outputs decentralization
Innovative Mutual Support staff Select_ed
organization adjustment decentralization
Missionary Standardization Ideology Decentralization
organization of norms
Political None None Varies
organization

72
ij~B ___
0R_G_AN_1_u,.;.__n_o..:..,:N_
::,::.~·t:. ,.. --
------------------
The organization .. . . . . .
often by choice since mu~t be flexible because it operates ma dynaunc env1ronm~nt,
But that env· tbat 1s the only place where it can outsmart the bureaucracies.
chief execut. ironment tnust be simple as must the production system, or else the
organizatio iv_e 7"uld E2! for long hold on to the lion's share of the .power. The
art becau n thlS O ten young~ in part because time drives it towards bureaucracy, in
P ·
of these O se •e vulnerab
• 1 of its simple structure often ~uses it to fat·1. And many
1Tty
bureau rgaNmza~ons are often small, since size too drives the structure ·toward
. ~nt1Ythe chief · executive purposely keeps the orgaruza · ti' on
order toot infrequ
small incracy.
· · Th . retam his or her personal control. .
and per e c1:stc, ca~e is, of course, the small entrepreneurial-firm, controlled tightly
leader. t~on Y ~Y 1!s owner..Sometimes, however, under the control of a strong
be rou' d _e o~g~ruzation can grow large. Likewise, entrepreneurial organizations can
parti
0
1
°
in he~ sectors too, like government, where strong leaders personally control
cu ar agencies, often ones they have founded Sometimes under crisis conditions,
1arge or · f ·
fi ful lgamzda ions also revert temporarily to the entrepreneurial fonn to allow
orce ea ers to try to save them. .

The Machine Organization

-1-----------------17

The machine organization- is the offspring of the industrial revolution, when jobs
became highly specialized·and work became highly standardized.· As can be seen in
the figure above, in contrast to entrepreneurial organizations, the machine one
elaborates is administration. First, it requires a large technostructure to design and
maintain its systems of standardization, notably those that formalize its behaviours
and plan its actions. And by virtue of the organization's dependence on these systems,
the technostructure gains a good .deal of informal power, resulting in a limited amount
of horizontal decentralization, reflecting the pull to rationalize. A large hierarchy .of
middle-line managers emerges to control the highly specialized work of the operating
core. But the middle-line hierarchy is usually structured on a functional basis all the
way up to-the top, where the real power of coordination lies. So the structure tends
to be rather centralized in the vertical sense. .
To enable the top managers to maintain centralized control, both the envh-on-
ment and the production system of th.e machine organization must ·be fairly simple,
the latter regulating the work of the operators but not itself automated. In fact,

73
-
oEALlNG
WITH STRUCTURE AND SYSTEMS
·
1
· _ ith mass production. Indeed, itis in_terestin~
. ru'zations fit most naturally w . · . that date back to the penod from
machme orga alent in industnes
that this structure is most prev l t of the twentieth century.
the Industrial Revolution to the ea y par. . .

The .Professional Organization

).

· · fi : ti. .b~t because this one relies on the

There is another bureaucratic con gura on, · ·· fi0 1·t a· ti
standardization of skills rather than of work processes or.outputs ~ s c~~r mall on,
it emerges as dramatically different _from the machme o~e. ere e 1P~. h;o
1
professionalize dominates. In having to rely o~ ~rained _professi~na s .- peop ~ 1g Y
specialized, but with considerable control over th:tr· wo~~' as m -~ospit~ or
universities .- to ·do its operating tasks, the organization surrenders a g~o~ deal ~f
its pow-~r not only to the profess'ionals themselves but B:lso to the associations and
institutions that select and train them in the first place. So the structure emerges as
highly decentralized horizontally; power over many decisions, both operating and
strategic, flows all the way down the hierarchyJo the professionals _of the operating
.-..·- .
·.core.
Above the operating core we find a rather unique structure. There is littl~ need
for !1 techn_ostructure, since the main·standardization occurs_ as a result of training
that. talces place outside·.the organi~tion. Because the ·professionals work so
independen~y,_the siz~ of.operating units can be very large, and few first line managers
-are. -needed...,.The-suppo1:t-staff-.is. . typically-:ver:y-lar:g~.foo,-in--md~r-t0--bac~ up. the·
high-priced professionals. · · · · .
. . The_professional organization ~s calld for.wheneve; an or:ganization finds itself
m ~ envuonment that is stable yet complex. Complexity requires decentralization
-to-highly-tr.ained-in?hdduals,-and..stabilicy.:.e~ables·..them-to-appl}'-Standar.dized~kills-
and so _to work ~1th a ·good_ ·deal ?f aut~nomy. To ensure that autonomy, the
~roduction sys_tem must.be neither h1g~ly regulating, complex nor automated. . ·
..... .

The Diversified Organization ·

Like the professional organizati~n the diversified . · •
organization as a set of rather ·i~de d . ~nets not so much an integrated
ad~inistrative structure. But wherea/t~n ent e?~1ties coupled to~ether by a loose
th
are individuals, in the diversified o e ose _enti_tle~ of the professional organization
'divisio~s', exerting a dominant p:il to ~a::~~:ts;~ _the middle li_ne, ·g~nerallr called
others m one major respect· i't i's t . ts configuration d1ffers from the
· · no a complete tru t b
supenmposed on the others Each d. . . h s c ure, ut a partial one
. · 1v1s1on as its t
. An orgamzation divisionalizes for one own s ructure. .
lines are diversified. And that tends to h reason above all, because its product
- . appen most often in the largest and most

74
ORGANIZATION

mature ~rgan~zati~ns, the ones that have run out of opportunities - or have ~eco:131e
bored - m th e1r traditional markets. Such diversification encourages the organ:t.zation
to replace functional by market-based units one for each distinct product line (as ·
shown in the ~iversified organization figure), and to grant considerab~e ~utono~y .
to each _to run its own business. The ·result is a limited form of de~~ntr~lt~ati~n down
the cha:m of command. · ·• · · •
How does the central headquarters maintain a semblance of control Jver the
divisions? Som~ direction supervision is used. But too inuch of that interferes· wi th
the neces~ary divisional autonomy. So the headquarters relies on performance control
systems, tn other words,. the standardization of outputs. To design these control
systems, headquarters creates a small technostructure. This is shown in the figure,
acr~ss from the small central support staff that headquarters sets up to provide certain
serv1:ces common to the divisions such as legal counsel and public relati9ns. ·And
because headquarte_rs• contro] constitutes external control, as discussed in the. first.
hypothesis on power, the sfructure ·of the divisions tend to be drawn 'towards the
.
..maohine.iorm. __ _
.

The ·Innovatlvi Organization

,---------,
I I
•I
,
~------------~ , ____ . --------, I
r
: I
I , . I
\ I
~------------------------------------~
None of the structures so far discussed suits the industries of our age, industries such
as aerospace, petrochemicals, think ta_nk consulting and :film-making. These organiza-
tions need above all to innovate in very complex ways. The bureaucratic structures
ar~ too inflexible, and th~ entrepreneurial one too centralized. These ind~sttjes reg_uire
'project structures', ones that can fuse experts drawn from different specialties into
smoothly functioning creative teams. That 1s the role of our fifth configuration, the

75
 D SYSTEMS ..
DEALlNq WITH $TRUCTURE AN

by the ~l
tive org ani zati on, wh ich we sha ll also call 'adhoc~acy', dominated
innova . . ·
orate. . : ~utuaJ
experts' puil to collab an org ani c stru cture tha t. relies for. c~o rdm atio? _on
. Ad hoc rac y is d experts , wh ich it
ong its hig hly · trai ned and hig hly .spec1al1ze
.
. t t am . , standing
aduus men . liaison de_v1ces - mtegratm_g managers
encourages by the extensive use of the exp erts are
tees and abo ve all task forc es and matnx structure. Typ1cally, the
commit Jn_gmall;_
.useke.eping_p_urp.oses_buLdeploy.ed
_grouped ..in..lunc.tionaLunits_JoL.b.o work. To -these teams, located all over the
their
. market-based -project teams to do ns to be ·made, is delegated power ove
r
acc ord anc e ·wi th the dec isio
structure in ely in the
cture becomes _decentralized- selectiv
different kinds of ·decisions. So the stru over
hor izo nta l ,dim ens ion s, tha t is, power is distributed unevenly, all
vertical and · -_ _ .
stru ctu re, acc ord ing to exp erti s~ and need. . . .. . ovative
the
the dist inc tion s of con ven tion al structure disappear in the inn
All ertise, the
as ure above: With power based on exp
organization, can he seen in the ·fig cture
dist inc tion eva por ates . Wi th pow er distributed throughout the stru
· line-staff rs. '
apex and the rest of the structure blu
the distinction between the strategic ple x and
environments that are both com
These organizations ~re found in tion, the type
s that require sophisticated i~nova
· dynamic, becaus~ those are the one e type of
caU s for. -the coo per ativ e effo rts of many- different kinds of expert_s. On
that sometimes
duction system that is very complex,
adhocracy is often associated with· a pro design
t~d , and so req uire s a hig hly ski lled·and influential support sta to ff
· auto~a lines of the
of the operating core. (The dashed
an,d maintain the technical system ini~tra:tive ·
re des ign ate the sep ara tion of the ope{ating core from the adhocratic a~m rating
.figu
structure.) Here the projects talce.place
in the administration to bring riew ope
). Another
lex is.designed in a petrochemicals firm
facilities on line (as when a n_ew "comp ctly for its clients (as in a· think tan
k
ocr acy pro duc es its pro jec ts dire
type of adh a result, . the
engineering prototypes). Here,· as
consulting firm of manufacturer of them·
rs also tak e par t in the pro jec ts, bringing their expertise to bear on
operato ted in th~
the administrative structure (as indica on···
......hence the ope~ating core blends into type._of adhocracy tends to be you ng
abo ve the d~s hed line ). Thi s sec ond
figure ile others
ducts or services, niany·tend to fail wh
av~rage, b~cause .with no standard pro con verting
the1 r vul ner abi lity by stan dar diz ing some products or services and so
escape
y:-1-
-t'hem-s-elws-t"O"Tfomrur-b,rreamrrcw

The· Missionary Organization

~
f--,.
~ ___ _ _ _ __J f--
'

·1 1 i i i i '\ '\ 1\
.. . .
two basic ty es ofadh adhocracy in his popular
iweshall clarify in~ later reading these : ~~s
d in print at Ieist as far b~; 2 9 ~~filcremploycd the"t crm
book Future Shark, but it can_be foun

7(,
~
~ ~
..-· , .
.
: ORGANIZATION
_, : ,:;_,-:;

.•,'
• ·· · ~ - - - - , . _
·, ... :-;..:_ ________
,.:.o~r s_ixth confi~ration forms another rather distinct combin.ation of ~e eleme~ts
-:--

·,·,. we
., ,...·have
b been discussing
· · When an orgaruzation
. . 1s. domm'ated by its ideology, its
di • •
:.,i?em ers ar~ en~ouraged to pull together, and so there tends to be a !oose vision
. ~f iab_our, httle Job specializati 11 d ti of the vanous forms of
~.ffer-entfa.tfon•found-in th-e·oth-e°n, ~ we -~~~~ ..?.~teincapexfrom the rest,
.-" t f ff fl . r n:on:u-grrrations - o, me s b· b tw n
P. -~~ons,rom
.. .div1S1_ me or administration from operations, between operators, e ee
and so on. · .
·:: ,. What ~ol~s the missionary together-that is, provides for its coordinatfon -is
. the standardization of n~rms, the sharing of values and beliefs among all its memb~rs.
th
And e k~y. to ensurmg this is their · socialization effected through tbe deSJgD
para~ete~ of indoctrination. Once the new member has been indoctrinated into the
organization ~ once he or she identifies strongly with the common beliefs - then _he
?r she~ ~e gi~en considerable freedom to.make decisions. Thus the result of effective
mdoctnnat1on _1s t~e most complete form of decentralization. And because o~her
!
.,f?rms 0 coordi ~abon need not be relied on, the missionary organization fonnahzes •
little of its be~av10ur as such and makes minimal use of plan~~ng and coµ~rol s7~tem~.
As a r~sult, It has "little techriostructure. Likewise, external profession~ traµung IS
not relied on, because that would force the org~ization to surrender a certain control
·to external agencies. . • ·
. ~ence, th_e missionary organization ends up as an amorphous mass of members,
with lit~e ~peci~lization as to job, diffe_rentiation as·to part,.division as. to stat~s. ·
~issionai.:ies tend not to be very young organizations - it takes time for .a set. I
of beliefs to become institutionalizeq as·an ideology. _Many missionaries do no~ ~et I

a c~_~ce to grow ve1! old either (with notable exceptions, sue~ as certain long-standing
religious orders). M1ssionary organizations cannot grow very large per se - they rely
on personal contacts among the'ir members _ although some tend to spin· off other
_~!J:Ql~Y~]jp. th~.form.ofr.elatively.fodependent-units-sbaring-the·sameideulo-gy:-N'eitlief ·
the environment nor the technical system of the miss1onai:y orga1:1ization can be very
complex, because that would require the use of highly skilled specialists, who would
hold a certain power and stains over others and.Jh.ereb¥_ser..v.e-to-diffei.:eatia~~the-
structure. Ihus w~o.uld_ex.pecLto-find-the-sifilplest--technical-systemrin-th-e-se-
organizations, usually hardly any at all, as in religious·orders or in the primitive fann
·cooperatives.

The Political Organization

.'\ r .
~- ' ,

77
 DEALING WITH STRliCIVRE AND SYSTEMS 1
Finally, we come to a form of organization ch~racterized, structu_rally at- least,. by
what it lacks. When an organization has no dominate part, no dom1~ant .mechanism
or coordination and no stable form of centralization or decentralizat1on, It may ~ave
difficulty tempering the conflicts within its mldst, and a.form of org~nization called
the political may result. What .characterizes its behaviour is the pulhng _apart of its.
different parts, as show in the figure a~ove. ·
--P..oliticaLorganizations_can_take_o.n_differentJ.onns,_S_ome_ar~ temporar:y~
reflecting ·difficult transitions iri strategy or structure that evoke conflict. Others are
more permanent, perhaps because the organization rn_ust face c?rnpeting internal
forces (say, between necessarily strong- marketing and production .departments),
perhaps because a kind of political rot has set in but the._organization is sufficiently ·
entrenched to support it (being, for example, a monopoly or a protected government
unit). ·.

Together, all tliese configurations seem to encompass and integrate a good' deal of
what we know about organizations. It should be emphasized however, that as
a
presented, each configuration is idealized - a simplification, really caricature of
reality. No real organization is ever exactly like any one of them, althoug~ some
do come remarkably -close, while •others seem to reflect combinations. of them,
sometimes in transition frpm one to another.
The.first five represent what seem to be the most common fonns of organizations;
thus these will form the basis. for the ''context' section ·of this book - labelled
entrepreneurial, mature, "diversified, innovation and professional. There, a reading in
each chapter will be devoted to each of these configur~tions, describing its structure,
functioning, conditions, strategy-making process and the issues that surround it. ,Other
readings in these .chapters will look at specific strategies· in each of these contexts,
industry conditions, strategy techniques, and so· on. · · ·
The other two configurations ·_ the missionary and the political - see~ to be
less common, !!Pzesented more by the forces of culture and conflict that exist in all
organizations than 'bydfs°tinctforms-assuch.-Hencetliey will be<lfscussecffitilie -··
chapter t_hat_.fol!ows this one, 'Dealing with Culture and Power'. · ·

e COLLABORATING TO COMPETE*
JOEL BLEEKE .AND DAVID ERNST :

For most global businesses, the days of flat-out, predatory competition are over. The
traditi.o_nal drive ·to pit one company against the rest of an industry, to pit supplier
ag~st supplier, distributor against dtstributor, on and on through every aspect of a
busmess no longer guarantees the lowest cost, best products or services, or highest
profits for winners of this Darwinian game. In businesses as diverse as phamiaceut-
used with the
* Ex:e~ted from '.Collaborating to Compete', Directors and Bo_ards (Winter, 1994);
penmss1on of McKinsey & Company. ·

78
 ..,
~
, it,RG~IZATION

1
,~~A?=~
~. ': ,. ----... ._____ ___ ____
. ;:itals,-Jet engines bant..:-
. •,.... ·· · ' '-UJ.IUllg and com
~~e~~-'to-head battles leaves the' puters, ~anagers h_ave learned that ~ghting long,
1i~ep~e~ed apd vulnerable to th tr comparues financially exhausted, mtellec~ally ·
{/,~·-:,·.~ ..Place of predation ~ next Wav~ of competition and innovation.
~~~t 90,Uaoorafefo comp ere: any ,_multinatio~~ co~p~es are learning that they
•,ah~:_.~t~eholders by selectiv rru1~afion~ an creafeliigliest value ror customers
~-~~kets, mformation and tec~os~anng. and tra~g control, cos~; cap~tal, access ~o
·.ti~? does not vanish. The co fogy Wlth compe~tor~ and suppliers alike: Competi-
Eotjipetitive. m.puter ~d commercial aircraft markets are s~ brutally
f:-'-~_>mste~d of competing blindl . . . .
tli_qse precise· areas where the by, comparues should mcreasmgly comp_e~e o~y 1;I1
-n~ces~ary to presetve indus Y ave a durable advantage or where participation 1s
pgwer comes from controllintry lo~er ~r c~pture value. !11 packa~ed goods, that
drrigs and access to do t _gM lSlribution; m pharmaceuticals, baVlng blockbust~r
elements of a global b ~ ors. anagers .are beginning to see that many necessary
n;,;.e assembly) ·or nn·usmess are so ~ostly (like R&D in semiconductors), so generic .
\~ 80
sense to•have a. traditional penetrable.(like
. . .some. of the_A~1~
· mar.~e
~. ts) that kw_
·+---akes
no .
that aJ.reac;ly have the ca h competitiye ~tance. The best approach is to find partners
Wh 8
. , scale, skills, or access you seek.
"llabora::. a ~o~any reaches across borders, its ability and willingness .to
c~. . . 18 e es~ predictor of success. The more equal the partnership, the
bnghter its future. ~~ means th~t both partners must be strong financially and in
_the p~o:~t or ~ction that they bring to the venture. Of 49 alliances that we
exam: m ~etail, tw~-thirds of thos~ between equally matched stro~g partners
~ucce_. ed, while ~bout 60 per cent of those involving unequal partners failed. So,
too, with· ~wnersbip. Frfty-fifty partnerships had the highest rate of success of any.
deal structure ~at we have examined.

Three Themes

~eed-fer-better:inder:s~an~g-ef-ei:ess-bereler-allianGes;-:-and-aGf!uisitic;ms-is-
·mcreaslhgly·ctear:-Cross-=lrordet-nnJrng1ef-ar~htronrlrrg-;-tlrlven-by-g1obalizatioir,-
Europe 1992, the ope~g of Eastern European anq Asian markets and an increased
need_ for foreign sales to cover the large fixed costs of playing in high-technology
businesses. Go-it-alone..strategies_ often .take. too .long, ..cost to_q much or· fajl._to .
provide insider access to markets_. Yet, large numbers of strategic alliances ana ·
cross-border acquisitions are failing. When we examined the cross-border alliances
and acquisitions of the largest 150 companies in the United States, Europe and
Japan, we found that only half of these ~ages succeed. The average life
expectancy for most alliances is approximately seven years. Common lessons from
the wide experience of many companies in cross-b~rder strategies are beginning to
emerge. · ·
··In general, three themes emerge from our studies of alliances:
. . .
c First· as we have mentioned, companies are learning that they must collaborate
to c~mpete. This requires different measure~ents of csu~cess' from those used
for traditional competition. . ·
e second, allianc~ between companies that are potential competitors represent

79
 DEALING WITH STRUCTURE AND SYSTEMS
l
an arbitrage of skills, market acces~, and_ capital _between the companies.
Maintaining a fair balance in this arbitrage 1s essent;tal for succ~s.
" Third, it is important for managers to develop a vision of inte~ational_strategy
and to see cross-border acquisitions and alliances as a fle':1~1e sequence of
actions _ not one-off deals driven by temporary com~etitive or financial
benefit. The remainder of this article discusses each _of these three themes in
--.....;mm.:e-detail,..:........--- - - - - - ----- - -- - -- _ _......____ _____ _
· Old me~sures ~uch as financial hurdles and strategic goals only have meaning
in the new context of collaboration. As markets become increasingly cqmpetitive,
managers are beginning to measure success based on the. scarcest .re~ollf~es,
including skills and access, not only capital. In the global marketplace, maxuruzmg
the value of skills and access can often be achieved only if managers are willing to
share ownership with and learn from companies much different from their own.
Suc~s increasingly C(?mes in .proportion to a ·company's ·willingness to accept
differences. · · . .
Successful collaboration also reqwres flexibility. Most alli~nces that endure
~e redefined in terms of geographic.or product scope. The success rate for alliances
. ~~t have changed their scope over time is more than twice that of alliances where
the scope has not evolved. Alliances with legal or ·nnancial structures that ·do· .not
permit change are nearly certain to fail. (See Figure 1 which gives Kenichi Ohmae's
Tips for Collaboration.) ·

Alliances as Arbitrage
·'
If ~ - ~arkets were equally accessible, all management · equally skilled, all
information readily available and all balance sheets equally solid, there would be
little need for collaboration among competitors. But they are not, so .companies
__ inqe.asingl:v..J;1~~e.fi.t_ by trading these_'chi_t!s' across. borders. . _ .
The global arbitrage reflected in cross-border alliances and acquisitionstakes·- .
· plac~ at a_ slower pace than -in ·capital markets, but the. mechanism is similar. Each
.Player uses the quirks,_· irrational differences and inefficiencies in the marketplace as
_w..ell_c!Le2,~_h company's advantages to muttial "bene fl~on~ ptappl ies-mo s!:}:y -·
to alliances, but cross-border acquisitions can also be viewed as an extreme example
of arbitrage: all cash or shares from the buyer, for all the·skills, products, and access
of the other company. ...
: · Successful ·alliance partners follow· several patterns -in handling the inherent ..
tensions of arbitrating with potential competitors. To begin with, they approach the
negotiation phase with a win-win situation. As one executive said, 'Do not sit down ·
to negotiate a deal - build links between the companies.'
Successful partners also build in conflict-resolution mechanisms such as
powerful boards of directors (for joint ventures) .and frequent ·communication
between top management of the parent companies and the alliance. The CEOs of the
parent comp~es need to be absolutely· clear on where co-operation is expected and
· where the 'old rules' of competition will apply. .
· . In approaching alliances ~ arbitrage, managers should recognize that the value
of 'chips' is likely to change over time. The key is to maxinµze your bargaining

80
 .•, :.· ORGANIZATION
~ .,, ·,-:<-~~;:·_. . I !
>_power - that is, the valu 0 f . · . hil
:Huso being ready to rene e. Y 0ll:t c~mpany's
contribution· to the alliance•-.w e
:, ii.ave had built-in fun gotiate the alliance as necessary. Some of the best alliances
· ·ai · th
· v _wng : ~~ntrtbutions _______________ ____
. .etables for assessing partner contributions and clear rules for
- · - - .going forward, . . . ... ._ _
· A Sequence of Actions

' Beyond the themes of coll b • • • · al deals

cross-border alliance a ?r~~on and arbitrage involved in mdiv1du . . ,
th t t f s _and acqumttons need to be viewed as a sequence of actions m
· thetc~~~ex O overa11 mternational strategy - not as one-off transactions. Companies
a Li:1.1\.e a pure1y fin ·a1 · ·
. 'ti .anci , deal-driven approach to cross-border alliances and
ll.cqws1 on~ usually wmd up in trouble. .
· L~oking at cross-border M&A [mergers and acquisitions], the most successful
~omp'.1111thes m~e a series of acquisitions that build presence in core businesses over
time m e target
c h ,· ... country • One consumer goods· company,
· ·
for example, made an
. an~ or acquisition of~ ~~ading brand to establish a solid preseµce.in an_imp_ortant
European market, then used its enhanced distribution 'ciout to ensure the acceptance
of several brands that were subsequently acquired.
· In. our Sl1;1dy of the cross-border acquisition programmes of the largest Triad
compames [Asia, ~urope, North America]i successful acquirers bad nearly twice the .
~~e~ge an~. 1;11edian number of purchases as unsuccessful· companies. Tbrpugh
m1tial acqws1tions, the acquirer refines M&A skills and.becomes more comfortable
wi1;h, and proficient at, using 'M&A for international expansion. And by completing
a seque~ce of transactions, particulariy•in the same geography, it is possible to gain
econonues through integrating operations and eliminating overlappin~ func~ons.
. .
-Willingness-to Rethink-·.:. __·__:--~-·-- ·.;---···--=··'--=-.- -·- ·.. .:. . - ·-----
. . . .
. . .
It is important to think about_cross:border allian~es, as well as 11cquisitions, as a part
of a seq:u.~ru::.e_of..ac.tions...MosLalliances_e.v..ol~e-o¥.er-time,so-the-im-tfal-shaft~F-and-
-tontraat-0ften~are-not-meaningful-within-a-few-years-:-Since-trouble-irlhe-ml.e;-?1,ot-
the exception, and since two:thircis of all cross-border alliances run into manage-
·ment ·trouble during the first few years, alliances require a willingness by partners to
rethink their situation on a cons~t ~-a~~s - . an_d ~~n~goti~te -~-µ~c~ssary._ . .· .
.. Alliances· sbould.usually.be considered as an intermediate strategic device that .
,:ieeds other transactions surrounding it. Approximately half of all cross-border
alliances terminate within seven years, so it is critical that managers µave a point of
view early on of 'what's next?'
Most terminating alliances are purchased by one of the partners, and
termination need not mean failure. But the high rate of termination suggests that
both parties should think hard early on about likely_ roles as a buyer or seller - the
prpbabilities are high that alliance partners eventually_ will be one .or the other.
The companies that can bring the largest short-term synergies to an alliance
are often those companies that will most likely be direct competitors in the long
term. So, if the desired sequence of management action does not include selling the
business a different, more complementary partner may need to be found at the
outset: Understanding the probable sequence of tt"MSactions is therefore important in

81
 DEALING WITH STRUCTURE AND SYSTEMS
1
__ __--:-_-,- ----:-- ----- - - ~3s
. . . . 1·
arly alliance of acquisition partners. As our coll eagues m apan
~~I
selecb.ng even e . . . . . th t h
•d
remm us,. no thing is worse in cross-border
. . . . alliances or acqumtions an o ave
, ·
'partners in the same bed with different ~eams . .

Postscript: A Look Ahea~

-Grlobal-coi::por.ations-of-the...future.-wi1Lbe....rather-like_amoebas-11ris;-5ingle~celled_
acquatic animal is among the most ·ancient life-fonns on earth. It gets all its .
nourishment directly from its environment through its permeable outer walls. These
· walls define the ·creature as distinct from its environment, but allow much of what is
inside to flow ~ut and mu~h of what is outside to come in. The amoeba is always
changing shape, taking and giving with the surroundings, yet it always retains its
integrity and identi.y as a unique creature. . ·_ . .
To be truly global and not merely 'big', organizations of the future must hold !
this permealiility as one of their highest'values. When managers enter a new market, ·
they should first ask these questions: 'How is business here different? Wh~t do I
need to learn?' They.have to seek partners that can share costs and ~"'.ap skills and
access to markets. In the fluid global marketplace, it is no longer possible or
desirable for single organizations 'to be entirely self-sufficient. Collaboration is the
. value of the future. Alliances are the· structure of the future. · · .
This has eno11I1ous impact on corporate strategy. It makes the world very
c·omplex, because there is no single valid rule book for all markets. As our studies
have demonstrated, alliances are based on arbitrating the qnique differences between
markets and partners. And so it is impossible to standardize an approach to the
topic. Managers at the corporate centre must be able to tolerate and in fact
encourage variation~.10 different m~k~ts, 10 different partners, 10 different ·
organizati.9n charts, 10 reporting systems,. and so on. Policies and procedures niust
be fluid. The word schizophrenia has negative connotations, but it captures this idea
that truly global organization must entertain two seemingly contradictory aspects - a .
stron:g identity, along with an openness to different ways of doing business; to._the·- ·
.value~ of different cultures and localities. . ·.
for
This duality is going to be very difficult ~any of the 'global' companies of
-rodaµomparuesWitlrasID~s-mrsed"'crrltnre-;-w~1>~WSltll come from.-
a sales background; will have a particularly hard time adapting to flus new
collaborative world. Such companies see the world as 'us and them'. They reject
ideas from the outside world, even if the concept is helpful. They find it hard to live
without standardization. They find it -hard to collaborate with .partners.· Deep .down,
they are trying 'to convert everyone to their own way of doing things.
This makes them inflexible and confrontational. They don't lmow how to
communicate and work with the outside world on its own tertns. They cannot be like
the ruJ?,Oeba, _with its permeable walls i and changing! shape, its I9penness· to take
from every environment. These companies may survive becaus~ 'they are large· and
po:werful, but they will cease to be leaders. ·

82
 FIGURE 1
Kenichi Ohmae's 'np& f C 11
. or o1 aboration
1. Treat the callaboratio
mitment It's pe 1 : as a_ personal com- 9. Appreciate that cultures - both geographic
--w-o &:- -··~o pe -~~Elak:_p~ersbips. and corporate - are different. Don't expect
2. Anticipate that it will t~ · a -partner to act or respond identically to
ti.me Ii you , e up management you. Find out the true -reason for a par-
. start. 't can t spare the time, don't
1. . ticular response.
'.3. Mutual respect and trust . 10. Rei::ogniz e your partner's interests and
, are essential. If independ
rou d?n t trust the people you are ne otiat- ence.
mg with, .forget it. g 11. '.?ven if the arrangement is tactical in your
4. Remember that both partn eyes, ~e sure you have corporate
. ers must get approval. Your tactical activity may be a
something out ~f it (money, eventually).
Mutual be~efit is vital. This· will probably key piece in an overall strategic jigsaw
mean you ve got to give ·something up puzile. With CO,IIJOrate commitment to the
. Recognize this from the outset. partnersh ip, you can act with the positive
.
5. Make sure you tie.up a tight leaal authority needed in these relationships.
D0 't t ff .. . .,. tr t
~ con ac • 12. Celebrate achievement togethed It's a.
~ P~. o resolving unpleasant or· con-
. .~hared elation, and you'll have earned iti
.tentious issues until 'later'. Once signed,
however, th~ c~ntract should be put away. Postscript
~ you refer to 1t, something is wrong with · Two further things to bear iri mind:
the relationship: 1. If you're negotiating a product original ·
6.. Recognize that during the course of a · equipment manufacturer (OEM) deal, look .-
collaboration, c;ircumstances and markets for a quid pro· quo. Remember that another
change. Recognize your partner's problems product may offer more in return.
anti be flexible. · · • 2. Joint development · agreements must
7. Make sure that you and. your partner bav~ include joint marketing arrangements. Yo~
mutual expectations of the collaboration need the largest market possible to recover
·-·-· '-and -its-tim.e-:-scale-:·-0ne-·pappy·-and-one· ····-···dev.elopment ..costs_and_,_to.•.get ·_yolume/
_,
unhappy 'partner is a formula for failure. margin benefits. .
8. Get to know your opposite numbers at all - Kenichl Ohmae
.
levels socially. Friends take longer to fall Kenichi Ohmae is Chairman of·McKin
sey &
out . . . .Co.'s offi._c_e_s._in_Ji_a_._p_an_.___.__ _ _ _ _ _ __

83
 6

Interest s, Conflic t,
and Power
Organizat ions as
Political Systems

oc
--.I

I live in a demoaatic society. Why should I have to obey the orders of my boss
eight hows a day? He acts like a bloody d!ctatoi; ordering us around and
telling us what we should be thlrudng and doing. What right does he have to
act in this way? The company pays our wages, but does this me.an it has the
right to command all our beliefs and feelings? It certainly has no right to reduce
us to mbols who must obey evety command.

nus rather angry comment of a factory worker exasperated by the

grinding and oppressive experience of daily work life captures an aspect
of organization that has escaped us up to now. He recognizes that his
rights as a citizen and as a paid employee are in conflict with each other.
As a citizen in a demoaatic society he is theoretically free to hold his own
opinions, make his own decisions, and be treated as an equal As an
149

150 SOM!i IMAGES OP ORGANIZATION
employee he is denied all these rights. He is expected to keep his mouth
shut, do what he is told, and submit to the will of his superior. For eight
hours a day, five days a week. he is expected to forget about democracy
and get on with his work. His only democratic right rests in the freedom
to find another job and move on. Or as his manager put it, "You can vote
with your feet. If you don't like it here, you don't have to stay."
The sihlalion descn'bed is an extreme one. Not all orgaru=lions are
characterized by such entrenched relations between managers and work-
ers or by such dictatorial modes of rule. But the situation is more common
than we often like to think, especially in industrial organizations where
battle lines have developed between labor and management. Typical or
not, the point of our illustration is that it invites us to understand organi-
zations as political systems.
Managers frequently talk about authority, power, and superior-
subordinate relations. n takes but a small step to recognize these as
political issues involving the activities of ntlers and ruled. If we develop
this idea, it is clear that we can understand organizations as systems of
government that vary according to the political principles employed.
Some, like the one considered above, may be highly authoritarian
while others may be model democracies. By recognizing that organization
is intrinsically politicaJ, in the sense that ways must be found to create
00
00
order and direction among people with potentially diverse and conflict-
ing interests, much can be learned about the problems and legitimacy of
management as a process of government and about the relation between
oxganization and society.
The political metaphor can also be used to unravel the politics of
day-to-day organizational life. Most people working in an organization
readily admit In private that they are surrounded by forms of "wheeling
and dealing" through which different people attempt to advance specific
interests. However, this kind of activity is rarely discussed in public. The
idea that organizations are supposed to be rational entexprises in which
their members seek common goals tends to discourage discussion of
political motive. Politics, In short, is seen as a dirty word.
This is unfortunate because it often prevents us &om recognizing that
politics and politicking may be an essential aspect of organizational life
and not necessarily an optional and dysfunctional extra. In this regard, it
is useful to remember that In its original meaning the idea of politics
stems from the view that, where interests are dive%gent, society should
provide a means of allowing individuals to reconcile their differences
through consultation and negotiation. For example, in ancient Greece,
~stotle adv~ted_ politics as a means of reconciling the need for unity
in the Greek polis (o.ty-state) with the fact that the polis was an "'aggregate
151
INlcRESTS, CONFLICT, AND POWER
of xnany members." Politics, for him, provided a means of creating order
out of diversity while avoiding forms of totalitarian rule. Political science
and many systems of government have built on this basic idea, advocat-
ing politics and the recognition of the interplay of competing interests as
a means of a-eating a noncoercive form of social otder.
By attempting to tmderstand organizations as systems of government
and by attempting to unravel the detailed politics of organizational life,
we are able to grasp important qualities of organization that are often
glossed over or ignored-
Organizations as
Systems of Govenunent
In April 1979, BusirussWuk ran a cover story
on the Fotd Motor Company. The cover featured a cartoon of Henxy Ford
II sitting in a thronelike driving seat with a driving wheel between his
hands. Behind the throne stands a shadowy figure-we are left to guess
who. The prominent Ford-like nose suggests that it may be Henry Fotd I,
founder of the Fotd dynasty, scrutinizing the way his grandson was driv-
ing the company. The focus.of the story was on the problem of succession.
After thlrty-four years as chief executive officer, Henry Il was contem-
plating retirement, but there was no obvious successor capable of taking
the wheel. Up 1mtil his demotion and dismissal in summer 1978, the pop-
ular candidate had been Lee Jacocca, the highly succ:essful Fotd executive
who later became head of Ouyslet The firing of Iacocca added depth to
the imagery conveyed In the cartoon, for it symbolized the authoritarian
nature of Fotd under the two Henrys. Iacocca's dismissal was merely the
most recent and controversial in a list of firings that had included the
names of seven company presidents since 1960. Iacocca was a popular
and powerful figure at the Fotd company but obviously not popular
where it mattered most His dismissal was solely linked to the fact that
he did not have Henry Il's approval. Henry II ls reported as having pre-
sented an "it's him or me" ultimatum. to his board's organization review
committee and won. The formal reason given by Henxy II to Busbttss-
Wttk was that Iacocca did not fit into his way of looking at things.
Informally, it is speculated that Jacocca's fate was sealed by the fact that
he .had become too powerful within the company. Although the guiding
philosophy of Ford was reported to be toward a General Motozs style of
-group management," Business Week stated that it believed Henry had
found it difficult to reconcile h1cnself with the Joss ofpersonalpower th11 t
this kind of dec:enlralizalion invo1ved.
 252 SOME O,IIAGES OP OR.GANlZATlON
Tite story at Ford is by no 1neans unique. Many organizations axe ruled
by authoritarian managers who wield considerable power as a result of
their personal characteristics, family ties, or skill in building influence
and prestige within the organization. Obvious examples are the owner-
operated firm where the principle that "It's my business and 111 do as I
like" holds sway; the family business ruled through "iron hands" that
respect family interest and tradition above all else; large corporations
such as ITr under Harold Geneen; and business firms, labor unions, and
even volunwy organizations or clubs dominated by self-perpetuating
. oligarchies. The basis of day-to-day order in these organizations tends to
be autocratic rather than democratic in that the ultimate power to shape
action rests in the hands of a single individual or group, who typic:ally
makes all the important decisions. Although it is .rare in practice to find an
organization that is completely autocratic, many organizations have
strong autocratic tendencies and characteristics..
When we summon terms like autocracy and demoaacy to describe
the nature of an organization we are implicitly drawing parallels between
organizations and political systems. As indicated in Exlu1>it6.1, we do the
same when we talk about organizations as bureaucracies or technocracies
because in each case we are characterizing the organization in tenns of
00
'-0 a particular style of political rule. In each of these words the suffix cracy,
which derives .&om the Greek kratia, meaning power or rule, is coupled
with a prefix that indicates the precise nature of the power or rule
employed. Thus, the word autocracy signifies the kind of absolute and
often dictatorial power associated with ruling by oneself. In a bureau-
cracy, rule is associated with use of the written word and is exercised by
bureaucrats who sit behind their bureaux, or desks, ma.king and adminis-
tering the rules that are to guide organizational activity. Power and
accountability in such organizations are intimately connected with one's
knowledge and use of the rules and with the lawlike fonn of administra-
tion that this implies.
In technocratic organizations, such as the flexible and ever-changing
firms that thrive .in the electronics industry and other turbulent environ-
ments, power and accountability are d.irectly linked to one's technical
knowledge and expertise. Whereas in autoaacies and bureaucracies the
pattem of power and authority is fairly stable and clearly defined,in tech·
nocrades it is often in .flux as different individuals and groups rise and
decline In power along with the value of their technical contn""butions.
Power and inlluet1ce often tend to follow the Nwhiz kids" and other
knowledgeable people who seem capable of addressing dominant con-
cerns or of opening new paths to corporate fame and fortune.
~.CONR.J.CT. ~~ ='!,,
Organlzatiar1$, like govuNXIU\'t:s, axi.ploy some•~tem of •i:u1e• as a =
of creating 3%\d maintaining order among lheir 1t\emben. Po\l\kal ana\~\s
can lhus make a valuable contribution to organi:zational analjs\s. The
following .ue among the most common varieties of political rule found in
organizations:
Autocracy: absolute govemment where power Is held by an individual
or small group and supported by control of critical resources, property or
ownership rights, tradition, charisma, and other claims to personal privilege
Bureauc:ncy: rule exercised through me of the written word, which
provides the basis for a rational-legal type of aulhori~ or "rule olI.aw"
Technocracy: rule l!X£l"Cised through we of knowledge, expert power, and
the ability to rolve relevant probleim
Codelennlnation: the form of :ule when!' opposing parties combine in the
joint management of mutual inlrresls, as in cx,alltion government or corpo-
ratism, each party drawing on a spedlic pcwer base
Representative democracy: rule exercised through the el«tion of officers
.mandated to act on ~ ol the el«torate and who hold office for a speci-
fied time period or so long as they command the support of~ elector.lie,
u in parliamentary govrnunent and Emms of worm control and slwe-
holder control in industiy
Ducct democracy: the system where everyone has an equal right to rule
and is involved in all decision making. as in many communal ozganizaffons
such as cooperatives and kibbutzim. It encourages self-organization as a
key mode of organizing
It is rare to find organizations that use just one of these dilferent kinds of
rule. Mo.re often. mixed types a.re found in practfce. For example, although
some organizations are more autocratic, more bureauaatic:, or more demo-
aatic than others, they often contain elements of other systems as well. One
of the tasks of poHtic:al analysis ls lo discover which prindples are In
evidence, wh-, when, why, and how.
Exhibit 6.1 Organlzalilln$ and Mode11 of Political Rule
Fmally, in democratic organizations, the power to rule rests with the
demos, or populace. This power may be exercised through representative
forms of management. where different stakeholders are formally repre-
sented .in decision-making processes, as in systems of codetennination or
 154 SOME IMAGES OF ORGANJZATION
coalition government and in forms of worker or shareholder control.
Democratic power may also be exercised directly through participative
fOIInS of rule where everyone shares in the management process.
Many people hold the belief that there is a separation between business
and politics and that they should be kept apart. Hence, when someone
proposes the idea that workers should sit on boards of directors or that
there is a case for employee control of industry, that peISOn is often
viewed as t:aldng an unwarranted political stand. However, the foregoing
discussion shows that this interpretation is not quite correct. The person
advocating the case of employee rights or industrial democracy is not
introducing a political issue so much as arguing for a different approach
to a situation that is already political. Organizations that are autocratic,
bureaucratic, or technocratic have as much political significance as those
dominated by systems of worker controL Theix political nature is simply
of a different kind, drawing on different principles of legitimacy.
The system of industrial codetermination that developed in West
Germany and other European countries after World War n explicitly rec-
ognizes the rival claims to legitimate rule that can be advanced by own-
ers of capital, C:l the one hand, and by employees, on the other. Under this
system, owners and employees codetermine the future of their organi-
0
zations by sharing power and decision making. The system varies widely
'° in application. For example, in Germany, codetermination varies from
industry to industry. In the coal and steel industries, legislation dating
from the 1950s provides for the appointment of supervisory boards com-
prising eleven members, five to be elected by shareholders and five by
employees, the remaining member being appointed by the other ten. The
supervisory board is then responsible for appointing a managing board
of three members to nm the day-to-day affairs of the organization. One
member of this board must be a business specialist, another a production
specialist, and the other a trade unionist. Elections to these boards are
held every three years. The boards are designed to give capital and labor
equal rights, although many would argue that this does not always work
out in practice. A modification of the codetemunation principle in other
European and North American countries is found in the appointment of
worker directors, as in Denmark. Norway, and Sweden, where a certain
number of seats on corporate boards are usually allocated to unioh repre-
sentatives. Another application of the principle is found in the forms of
corporatism where management, unions, and government join together to
consult and collaborate with each other on issues of mutual interest.
Although such developtnents recognize the rights of labor to partici-
pate in the i:nanageinent 0£ an enterprise, they have not always been read-
ily eu:\braoed by those in the labor m.ovem.e:n~ TI\e reason for this is found
INTERESJ'S, CONFLICT, AND POWER 155
in another political principle: that in healthy systems of government
those in power should be held in check by some form of opposition. Many
people concerned with the rights of labor fear that direct involvement in
the management process creates a situation that co-opts or incorporates,
and hence reduces, the power of dissent. By being a part of a decision-
making process one loses one's right to oppose the decisions that are
made. Many advocates of labor rights have thus suggested that employee
interests can best be protected through associations such as labor unions
or professional bodies that adopt an oppositional role in order to shape
policy without owning it.
This problem of "incorporation" often accompanies changes in organi-
zation favoring increased employee participation in decision making. The
fear of many opponents of such changes Is that employees will be allowed
to exercise their democratic rights in decisions of minor importance while
being excluded from major ones. "We're allowed to choose the color of
the wallpaper but little else" is a familiar complaint. As these critics see it,
partial movements toward industrial democracy are often motivated by
a managerial intent to divert or diHuse potential opposition by sharing
the less important aspects of control For these reasons, advocates of
industrial democracy suggest that participation is not enough and that
organizations should move- toward styles of management based on fully
developed forms of workers' controL
These have been widely employed in Eastern European countries such
as the former Yugoslavia. where workers elected their managers and
where the principle of self-management provided a key organizational
value. This kind of system differs from schemes of codetermination that
recognize that owne.rs of capital and labor have equal rights by dissolving
the distinction between capital and labor. In countries where industry is
state owned, this fonn of self-management is fairly easily achieved, but
elsewhere it has run into difficulties from those who wish to prorect the
rights of owners.
The most obvious large--scale experiments in workers' control in
capitalist countries have occurred in ailing firms and indushies where
changes in fortune have increased the probability of unemployment and
plant closures and prompted the desire of owners to sell their interest in
the organization. The employee response has occasionally been to buy
and run the company, often with mixed success, partly because the orga-
nizations are in declining industries and partly because of the problems 0£
co-option that arise when workers beco.me or appoint .man.agers of an
o.rganization operating in a capitalist syste.m. l.i.ke other znanagers in
nondemocratic organizations, they .ind that suzv.ival In the systeD1 caDs
for certain ld.nds of action t:ha~ are not- aisva~ popular Mdll, llle.Lr k.uo..,

7.56 SOJ't.fii ~ C E S OP ORGANIZA.TION
owner-employees. The systeat has a logic of its own, and being an owner
does no~ necessarily intply freedom of action.
Whether we are discussing the management of the Ford Motor
Company under a member of the Ford dynasty or the management of
a worker-controlled coopen.tive, it. is clear that organizational choice
always implies political choice. Although the language of organization
theory often presents ideas relating to the management and motivation
of people at work in relatively neutral tem\s-for example. as issues
or leadership style, autonomy, partidpation, and employer-employee
relatio~they are by no means as neutral as they seem. In understand-
ing organizations as political systems we have a means of exploring the
political significance of these issues and the general relation between
politics and organization.
Organizations as
Systems of Political Activity
An analysis of organization from the perspec-
tive of comparative government can place our understanding of organi-
zations in a refreshing perspective. However, in order to understand
'° the day-to-day political dynamics of organization, it is also necessaxy to
explore the detailed processes through which people engage in politics.
For this purpose, it is useful to return to Aristotle's idea that politics stems
from a diveISity of interests, and trace how this diversity gives rise to
the .,wheeling and dealing," negotiati011, and other processes of coalition
building and mutual influence that shape so much of organizational life.
An organization's politics is most clearly manifest in the conflicts and
power plays that sometimes occupy center stage, and in the com1tless
interpersonal intrigues that provide diversions in the flow of organiza-
tional activity. More fundamentally, howevei; politics occurs on an ongo-
ing basis, often in a way that is invisible to all but those directly involved.
We can analyze organizational politics in a systematic way by focusing
on relations between interests, amfli.ct, and p(IU)er. Organizational politics
arise when people think differently and want to act differently. This diver-
sity creates a tension that must be resolved through political means. As
we have already seen, there are many ways in which this can be done:
autocratically ("We'll do it this way"); bureaucratically ("We're supposed
to do it this way"); technocralically ("It's best to do it this way"); or demo-
c:ratieal.ly (#How shall we do It?j. In each case the choice between alter-
native paths of action usually hinges on the power relations between
the actors involved. By focusing on how dive.cgent interests give rise to
.........
INTBttESTS,. C::ONFUCI'., ANDPOW'BR. "\S7
conflicts, vis\ble and invislole, that axe resolved. o i : ~ t e d~ van=
kinds of power play, we c:an make \he analysis of otganiza\icmal l)(>\itics
as rigorous as the ana\ys;s o{ any o\her aspect of otganizalional life.
ANAL'YZING INTERESTS
In talking about "interests" we are talking
about predispositions embracing goals, values, desires, expectations, and
other orientations and inclinations that lead a person to act in one way
rather than another. In everyday life we tend to think of interests in a
spafiaI way: as azeas of concem that we wish fo preserve or enJaxge or as
positions that we wish to protect or achieve. We live uin" our interests,
often see others as "enaoac:hing" on them, and readily engage .in defenses
or attacks designed to sustain or improve our position. The now of poli-
tics is intimately connected with this way of positioning ourselves.
There are many ways in which we can define and analyze this puzsuit
and defense of inten!sts. One way that has particular .relevance for under-
standing organizational politics is fo conceive interests in terms of three
interconnected domains .relating to one's-organizational task, career, and
personal life (Exlubit 6.2). Task intertsls are connected with the work one
has to perform. The manager of a production plant .has to ensun! that
products are produced .in a timely and efficient manna: A salesperson
must sell his or her quota of goods and sustain customer relations. An
accom1tant must maintain appropriate records and produce regular
accounts. However, work life alway;, involves more than just doing one's
job. Employees bring to the workplace aspirations and visions as to what
their future may hold, providing the basis for omer inlensts that may be
independent of the job being ped'onned. They also bril!g tneir personali-
ties, private attitudes, values, preferences, and beliefs and sets of conunit-
menls &om. outside wor~ allowing these txfnmlu10l interests to shape the
way they act .in .relation to both job and careei:
The relations among the three sets of interests are best undeistood if
we examine a specific situation. Consider, for example, the position of a
corporate executive working in a large organization. He may be highly
committed to his job, ambitious, and also highly involved with family life.
In his work experience, he may desire to manage all three: to do a good
Job, move ahead in the organization, and strike a reasonable balance
between work and leisure so that he can spend weekends and most
evenings with his family. In some situations, all three may coincide; in
others, two spheres of interest mJJ.Y be compatible; whereas in others, the
different interests may have no relation with each other. Life runs very
smoothly for the executive in the fust case (e.g., he gets a great idea that
. . = ~~
 INTI!lU!STS, CONFLICT, AND POWER 159
158 50MB IMAGES OF ORGANlZATION

Some people are committed to doing their job as an end in itself; others
are more careerist. Yet others spend most of their energy attempting to
make work life less onerous or as comfortable and consistent with their
personal preferences as possible. Many people manage to achieve consid-
erable degrees of overlap between competing aims and aspirations, shap-
ing their general task or mission in a way that allows them to achieve all
their aims at once. Others have to content themselves with compromise
positions.
This way of understanding different kinds of interests provides us with.
a means of decoding the personal agendas underlying specific actions and
activities. We can begin to understand how people relate to their work
through their own personal concerns and detect the motivating factors
The above diagram illustrates !he relationships .md tensions that often exist · that underpin the varied styles of careerism, gamesmanship, task com-
between one's job (task), career aspirations, and personal values and lifestyle mitment, rigidity, "turf protection," zealousness, detachment, and free-
(extramural interests). The three domains can interact (the shaded areas) and also wheeling that lend the polltics of organizational life its detailed c:hancter.
remain sepazate. In working in an organizatian we try to strilce a balance between
By simply following one's personal inclinations, the drama of OTgani-
!he three sets of Interests. Most of\en, the balance is an uneasy and ever-changing
one, creating tensions that lie at the center of political activity. The !act that the
zational life is shaped by a polfgcal script. However, the political content
area of complete convergence of interest$ is often small (the darkest area) is one increases manyfold when we begin to recognize the existence of other
reason why organizational {or task) rationality is such a :rare phenomenon. The players, each with. interest-based. agendas to pursue. The politicking to
degree of overlap varies from situation to situation. which this gives rise becomes particularly visible in situations that pre-
sent choices between different avenues for future development and in
N
'° Exhibit 6.2 Organizational lntettS!s: Task, Career, and Extramural other transitional C'OI\texts such as the influx of new people or the suc:ces-
sfon of one person by another.
For the purpose of ffiustration, consider the following case exai:nple.
contnbutes to his job performance and promotion prospects and gives Mr. X was the llamboyant marketing vice president in a medium.-
him more leisure time as well) but gets difficult in the latter cases. His size cosmetics firm. After five yeus, he had a solid reputation within his
great idea may improve performance and career prospects but mean more firm, having steered many successful campaigns designed to establish the
work and less leisure. Or it may enable him to reduce his workload but in fum's products as premier brands available in up-maxket retail outlets.
a way that makes him less visible and hence a less obvious candidate for Although he had encountered difficult times in persuading his colleagues
promotion. Sometimes, the idea will be great for getting on with his job that it was preferable to concentrate on relatively low-volume, high-
but have no other significance at all. The executive's attitude and relation quality products rather than to go for the mass market, over the years
to tasks, ideas, and the suggestions of others ~ all likely to be auclally they had c:ome to accept his viewpoint. His marketing philosophy and
affected by where the tasks, ideas, or suggestions fall on the map of inter- vision were in keeping with his pexsonality, reflecting an interest and
ests depicted in Bxlu"bit 6.2. The tensions existing between the different involvement with the social elites with whom he felt at home. The settings
interests that he wishes to pursue make his relation to work Inherently and themes of the firm's ads were selected by Mr. X and, as noted by
"political,"' even before we take into account lhe existence and actions of many of his colleagues, were very muc:h a reflection of his personal
other organizational membei:s. These tensions are Inherent in work life in lifestyle. Cnicial to the adoption of this madceting strategy and the line of
Western society because of the latent contradictions between the demands corporate development it involved was the support of key members of
of work and leisure, on the one hand, and lhe demands of present and the board who shared family connections and a taste for the style of life
future, on the other.
symbolized by Mr. X and his marketing philosophy. Other, Jess well-
The orientation of different people toward these tensions varies &om connected members who were appointed for their professional knowl-
situation. to situation, producing a great variety of styles of behavior.
edge and links .vith the industry, at large, along Mrith the c:hfef executive
 >60 90Mli IlvlAGES O P ORGA.N'IZATION
officer and a n11ntber of vice presidents, felt that many opportunities w~
being lost by the need to presei:ve an elite image. Whenever possible, they
thus tried to mobilize an awareness of the need to consldel" othel" policy
options, but the success of the company muted their inclination to press
their concerns too far. So Jong as M.r. X's charismatic influence remained
an important driving force, the firm was thus committed to preserving
and developing ils elite status.
An opportunity for change dropped by chance in the mailbox of~ Y,
vice president for corporate planning and one of those most concerned
about the lost opportunities. A friend and former colleague, now chief of
a prestigious "head-hunting"' firm, had written asking if he could recom-
mend possible candidates for the position of marketing VP in the new
North American branch of a European firm dealing in high-society fash-
ion. A vision of ~ X smiling in the midst of fws, diamonds, and Paris
fashions immediately floated into Y's mind. Within the holll" he had /
made an off-the-record call to his friend suggesting that Mr. X mJght
well be approached. Within two months, M.r. X had been offered and had
accepted the job.
Mr. X's swxessol" at the cosmetics firm, Ms. Z, was a relatively young
w
'° anr.l ambitious woman with a liking for the glossy life. She had been a
compromise selection, the board having been split on two other candi-
dates. Ms. Z seemed to strike the balance between the dashing style to
which X's allies had become accustomed and the promise of new initia-
tive favored by those who had felt constl"ained by the direction set by X's
philosophy. Even though neither group was delighted with the appoint-
ment, they both felt that Ms. Z was eminently capable of handling the job,
especially since she would inherit a successful operation.
Fol" Ms. Z, the job was a great opportunity. She felt that the time was
rig!tt to make hel" mill'k in the industry and saw in the steady direction
steered by X a base on which to launch new initiatives. In her intel"View
discussions with X's fonner supporters she had made much of the need
to conserve what had been achieved. In her discussions with those less
·committed to this philosophy she had stressed the promise of new mar-
kets. Hel" first year in the new job was spent developing an initiative that
would bring these goals together: By retaining the up-mlll"ket image but
broadening marketing outlets to include selected chaJns of retail 'drug and
department stores. She knew that she had to come up with a philosophy
that set hei- apart from X, but that she must retain the support of the board
and the senior executives who were essential for ensuring success. Her
colleagues ready for a change were willing partners, and excellent work-
ing relations soon developed through a give-and-take approach that
helped define ideas and opportunities where all seemed to gain. Her task
~.. CON'FUCT., ~YO"N"'Ek '-"'-
in relation to those who still eq_u,.ted. the style and -pencmality ot 'Mr. "X.
with what the company stood for was II\Uch more diffu:ult. °B25\s't.m.~e
end heated exchange became a feature of boardroom c:liscussi.on. Over
a period of three years. however, most Cln\e to accept the idea that the
broadening of the market was still consistent with the image of a high-
status product, particularly since the changing strategy was sweetened by
its obvious financial success. As one board member put it while looking
at the latest returns, "I think I'll be able to live with even more ads in those
dreadful magazines If I think about these figures."
Our case onJy sketches the dynamics of the situation in broadest out-
line. However, it serves to illustrate the politics inbinsic to any situation
where people wish to pursue diveigent inteJ-esfs. Mi: X had a vis.ion that
others were persuaded to share. His charismatic personality allowed him
to use the o~tion to express hlmself through a strategy that com-
bined task, careez; and extramural interests in a coherent way. The col-
leagues who bought into his strategy did so to the extent that their aims
were achieved as well. Those opposed to the strategy rad other aspira-
tions. They wanted to see the organization go elsewhen!. For this reason
Mr. Y took advantage of a chance opportunify to change the situation. The
state of transition opened up new opportwufies. Rival coalitions formed
around the candidates w}Jo people tlwught would be able to advance
theh- interests. Ms. Z, the vexy able compromise candidate, read and
played the situation well. She saw a convergence between personal and
corporate oppo.rtunity and used her new job to further both. Given her
ambitions there was no way that she could accept the status quo. Her
personal style and career aspirations required her to "be a mover" and
"make her mark." X's phllo,oph~ although solidly successful, thus had to
change. Others were prepared to join Zin shap.ing a new corporate direc-
tion in retwn for prizes of their own. The confidence of the rival coali-
tions, although doubtful at times, wa.s retained because the new situation
resulted in a transformation that most could identify with. Even though
our discussion glosses over the power relations and other aspects of this
case, the interactions between these few key actors and their supporters
illustrate the thick and rich political dynamic of organizational life. The
diversity of interests that Aristotle observed in the Greek city-state ls evi-
dent in every organization and can be analyzed by uadng how the ideas
and actions of people collide 0l" coincide.
In contrast with the view that orgamzations are integrated rational
enterprises pl.USUing a common goal, the political m.etaphol" encourages
us lo see organi2ations as loose networks of people with divergent
interests who gather together for the sake of expediency (e.g., making a
living, developing a career, or pursuing a desired goal or objective).

SOME IMAGES OF ORGANIZATION
162
Organizations are coalitions and are made up of coalitions, and coalition
building is an important dimension of almost all organizational life.
Coalitions arise when groups of individuals get together to cooperate
in relation to specific issues, events, or decisions or to advance specific
values and ideologies. Organizations fit this definition of coalitions in
the sense that they comprise groups of managers, workers, shareholders,
customers, suppliers, lawyers, governmental agents, and other formal
and informal groups with an interest or stake in the organization but
whose goals and preferences differ. The organization as a coalition of
diverse stakeholders is a coalition with multiple goals.
Some organization theorists draw a distinction between cliques
that become aware of common goals and coalitions of two or more such · ·
groups who unite to pursue a joint interest, often working against a rival
network. Clearly, people in organizations can pursue their interests as
individuals, specific interest groups, or more generalized coalitions, so
this distinction is often a useful one. In many organizations, there is often
a dominant coalition that controls important areas of policy. Such coali-
tions usually build around the chief executive or other key actors in the
organization, each participant making demands on and contnoutions to
the coalition as a price of participatioIL All coalitions have to strike some
kind of balance between the rewards and contn'butions nece5SillY to sus-
~
'° tain membership, a balance usually influenced by factors such as age,
organizational position, education, time spent in the organization, and
values and attitudes.
Most approaches to organization actually foster the development
of cliques and coalitions, as functional and other divisions fragment
interests-for example, allocating different goals and activities to sub-
units such as departments or project teams. The "bounded rationality"
discussed in Chapter 4 thus assumes a political dimension as salespeople
become preoccupied with sales objectives, production people with
production, and project teams with their group projects. Given such
fragmentation, there is often considerable disagreement about specific
objectives, requiring the organization to flmction with a minimal degree
of consensus. This allows the organization to survive while recognizing
the diversity of the aims and aspirations of its members. The organization
often has to be content with satisfacto,:y rather than optimal solutions to
problems, with negotiation and compromise becoming more important
than technical rationality.
Coalition development offers a strategy for advancing one's interests
In an organl2ation, and organization members often give considerable
attenti?" to inaeasing their power and influence tluough thJs means-
SoD'\.et:unes.,. coalitions are initiated. by less powerful actor.1 who seek the
163
JNIERESTS, CONFLICT, ANO POWER
support of others. At other tim.es, they may be developed by the powerful
to consolidate their power; for example, an executive may promote
people to key positions where they can serve as loyal lieutenants.
Whether formal or informal, confined to the organization or extended to
include key interests outside, coalitions and interest gJ:OUps often provide
important means of securing desired ends.
UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT
Conflict arises whenever interests collide. Tite
natural reaction to conflict in organizational contexts is usually to view
it as a dysfunctional force ll?t can be attn'buted to some regrettable
set of circumstances or causes. "It's a personality problem." "'They're
rivals who always meet head-on.H "Production people and marketing
people never get along." "Everyone hates auditors and accountants."
Conflict is regarded as an unfortunate state that in more favorable
circwnstances would disappear.
Our analysis in the previous section suggests otherwise. Conflict
will always be present in organizations. Conflict may be personal. inter-
personal, or between rival groups or coalitions. It may be ~uilt into cnga-
nizational ·structures, roles, attitudes, and stereotypes or arise over a
sca.rclty of resources. It may be explicit OT covert. Whatever the reason,
and whatever the fonn it takes, its source rests in some pexceived. OT real
divergence of interests.
As Scottish sociologist Tom Burns has pointed out. most modern
organizations actually encoUTage organizational politics because they
are designed. as systems of sis:nultaneous competition and collaboration.
People must collaborate in pursuit of a common task, yet are often pitted
against each other in competition for limited resources, status, and career
advancement. These conflicting dimensions of organization are most
clearly symbolized in the hierarchical organization chart, which is both a
system of cooperation, in that it reflects a rational subdivision of tasks, and
a career ladder that people are motivated to climb. The fact that there are
more jobs at the bottom than at the top means that competition for the
top places is likely to be keen and that in any career race there are likely
to be far fewer winners than losexs. The system more or less ensw-es the
kinds of competitive struggle on which organizational politics thrives.
One does not have to be consciously cunning or deviously political to
end up playing organJzationaJ politics. The corporate Mac:hiavellis
-who syste.matically wheel and deal fheir way through organizational
affair., merely illustrate the most extreme and fuJ/y deveio_ped mnn ofa
la ten~ tendency present- .in z:nos~ aspects oF o ~ Q o . n a . l .llFe.
 164 SOM'B IMAGES OP ORGANlZA-nON
The literature on o.rganizatfon theo:ry Is full of examples of how
everyday organizational life produces wpolilicalff fonns of behavior. Some
of the most vivid of these are found In reports by sociologists who have
lnfiltnled the workplace in the role of participant observers. The setting
of budgets and work standards, the day-to-day supervision and control of
work, and the pursuit of opportunity and career are often characterized
by sophisticated forms of gamesmanship. Take, for example, the situa-
tions reported by W. F. Whyte in his classic study Money and Motivation.
These reveal the guile with which factory wodcers are able to control their
pace of work and level of eamings, even when linder the close eye of their
supecvisors or of efficiency expetts trying to find ways of increasing pro-
ductivity. The workers know that to maintain their positions they have to
find ways of beating the system and do so with great slcill and ingenuity.
For example, Starkey, an experienced factory worker, finds ways of
building extra movements into his job when work standards are being set
so that the job can be made easier under normal clrcumstances. He also
finds completely new ways of wodcing at high speeds when his supetvi-
sor is not around, thus allowing him to create slack time elsewhere in his
day. Ray, famed among his fellow workers !or his skill in outthinlcing
'°v, and oulpetforming his controllexs, finds ways of getting his machine to
destroy the product on which he is working when he is asked to work
at too fast a pace. He also has a great ability to look as if he is working
harder than he is, generating a profuse sweat to impress and deceive his
observers. Workers share fdeas on how to get better work standards, to
restrict output, to cash in on "gravy" jobs, or to land their competitors
with the "stinkers." Such collaboration is often used against management
and at other tiJlles against other workers or work teams. Managem.ent, of
course, often knows that this is happening but is frequently powerless to
do anything about it. particularly where plants are unionized. Sometimes,
management gains control of the problem at hand, only to find another
one arising elsewhere. The relationship is essentially combative. The
status and sell-respect of each group rest on their ability to outwit or
control the other.
Similar relations are found in office settings, where staff manage
impressions and schedules in a way that makes them seem busier and
more productive than they actually are. Also, in budget-setting and other
decision-making sessions, managers often attempt to outwit their own
managers by padding their estimates to create slack resources or by nego-
tiating easy work targets to allow room !or error or to allow them to look
good when the next salary review comes around.
Poliliclcing is also latent in the horizontal relations between specialist
wuts and within multidisciplinary teams. As noted earlier, people begin
to identify with the responsibilities and objectives associated with theit
~.COl-ffUCT.M-«>YO~ "\.EE,
specific role, wo,k gn,up, department, o< pn,\ec\ teain, 'in a. way ~ t often
leads them to value ac:blevement of these respons\bililies and ob\eoives
over and above the achievement of wider organl2alional goals. Tols is
especially true when reward systems and one's general status and sense
of success are linlced. with good perfo:anance at the level of one's special-~
1
!zed responsibilities.
Even when people recognize the Importance of worlqng together, the
nature of any given job often combines contradictory elements that create
various kinds of role conflict. For example, the politicized interactions
so often observed between production and Jillll"keting staff or between
accountants and the usezs of finandal services often rest in part on the fact
that they are being asked to engage in activities that .Impinge on each
other in a negative way. The product modification requested by market-
ing creates problems in the design and sequencing of production. The
a~o\U\tant's concern for firm control over expenditures proves an WlWel-
come constraint for executives in the spending department As the actors
in their various roles attempt to do the job for which they have been
appointed, interpreting their task interests in a way that seems Ideally
suited for the achievement of organizational goals, they are set on a colli-
sion co=e. Similar conflicts are often observed between "line" managers
responsi"ble for day-to-day results and '"staff" people such as planners,
lawyers, accountants, and other experts who perform an advisory role;
between professionals seeking to extend their spheie of autonomy
and bureaucrats seeking to reduce It In the Interests of improving control;
and soon.
The potential complexity of organizational politics is mind-boggling,
even before we take account of the personalities and personality clashes
that usually bring roles and their conflicts to life. Sometimes, the conflicts
generated are quite explicit and open for all to see. At other times, they lie
beneath the surface of day-to-day events. For example, relations in meet-
ings may be governed by various hidden agendas of which even the
participants are unaware. In some organizations, disputes may have a
long history, decisions and actions in the present being shaped by con-
flicts, grudges, or d!Herences that others believe long forgotten or settled.
The manager of a production department may align with the marketing
manager to block a proposal from the production engineer not because he
disagrees with the basic ideas but because of resentments associated with
the fact that he and the production engineer have never gotten along.
Although such resentments may seem petty, they are often powerful
forces in organi2ational life.
Many organizational conflicts often become institutionalized in the
attitudes, stereotypes, values, beliefs, rituals, and other aspects of organi-
zational culture. 1n this socialized form, the underlying conflicts can be
 166 SOME IMAGES OF ORGANIZATION
extremely difficult to identify and to break down. Here again, history can
shape the present in subtle ways. However, by remembering Aristotle's
injunction to understand the source of politics in the diversity of interests
to which conflicts merely lend visible form, organizational analysts have
a means of penetrating the surface of any conflict situation to understand
its genesis. We will examine some of the ways in which conflicts can be
managed when we discuss the politics of pluralist organizations later in
th.is chapb!i:.
EXPLORING POWER
Power is the mediUJ1\ through which conflicts
of interest are ultimately resolved. Power influences who gets what,
when, and how.
In recent years, organization and management theorists have become
increasingly aware of the need to recognize the importance of power in
explaining organizational affairs. However, no really clear and consistent
definition of power has emerged. While some view power as a resource
(Le., as something one poS9eSSe:S), others view it as a social relation
characterized by some kind of dependency (i.e., as an influence over
'° something or someone).
°' Most organization theorists tend to take their point of departure from
the definition of power offered by American political scientist Robert
Dahl, who suggests that power involves an ability to get another person
to do something that he or she would not otherwise have done. For some
theorists, th.is definition leads to a study of the "here-and-now" condi-
tions under which one person, group, or organization becomes dependent
on another, whereas for others it leads to an examination of the historical
forces that shape the stage of action on which contemporary power rela-
tions are set. As listed in Exhibit 6.3, the sources of power are rich and var-
ied, providing those who wish to wheel and deal in the pursuit of their
interests with many ways of doing so. In the following discussion we will
examine how these sources of power are used to shape the dynamics of
organizational life. In so doing we will be creating an analytical frame-
work that can help us understand the power dynamics within an organi-
zation and identify the ways in which organizational members can attempt
to exert their influence.
Formal Authority
Tite first and most obvious source of power
in an organization is formal authorlty, a fonn of IegitiJnized power th.at
is respected and acknowledged by those with whom one interacts. .As
. ___
I»l'ERESI'S, CONFLICT, AND POWER 167
The following are among lhe most important source, of power.
1. Formal authority
2. Control of scarce :resources
3. Use of organl:utional structure, rules, and .regula.tlons
4. Control of dedsion p ~
5. Control of knowledge and information
6. Control of boundaries
7. Ability to cope with uncertainty
8. Control of technology
9. lnlezpersonal alliaru:ies, networks, and amtrol of Minfonnal organizationM
10. Control of counterorganizations
ll. Symbolism and the management of meaning
12. Gendec and the management of gender ~lations
13. Structural factors that define the stage of action
14. The power one already has
The sources of power provide OTganlzational members with a variety of
means for enhancing their interests and resolving or perpetuating orgaxu-
zational conflict.
Exhibit 6.3 Sources of Power in Organizations
sociologist Max Weber has noted, legitimacy is a form of social approval
that is essential for stabilizing power relations. It arises when people rec-
ognize that a person has a :right to rule some area of human life and that
it is their duty to obey. Historically, legitimate authority has been under-
pinned by one or more of three characteristics: charisma, aadition, or the
rule of law (see Exru"bit 9.1 in Chapter 9 for further details).
Charismatic authority arises when people .respect the special qualities
of an individual (charisma means "gift of grace") and see those quaHties as
defining the right of the individual to act on their behall. Traditional
authority arises -when people respect the custom and practices of thepast
.and vest authority in those w-ho syznbolize and embody these lradfbon.:u
..alues. J\dana.rch.s and oLhen, ,,.,ho .ruie because of.SOD7~ .lcfnd of.,,inh,eri~

status acqwre their right to rule through this kind of principle.
Bureaucratic or rational-legal authority arises when people insist that the
exercise of power depends on the correct application of formal rules and
procedures. Those who ecerdse bureaucratic authority must win their
rights to power through procedural mean.c;-for example, by demonstrat-
ing ownership or property rights in a corporation, through election in
a demoaatic system. or by demonstrating appropriate professional or
technical qualifications in a meritocracy.
Each of these three kinds of formal authority may be f0tmd in modem
organizations. A hero figure may acquire immense charismatic power
that allows that person to control and direct others as he or she wishes. The
owner of a family fum may exercise authority as a result of membership in
the founding family. A bureaucrat may exen:ise power as~ result of the for-
mal office held. So long as those who are subject to the kind of authority in
use respect and accept the nature of that authority, the authority serves as
a form of power.Hit is not respected. the authority becomes vacuous, and
power depends on the other sources named in Exhibit 63.
The most obvious type of formal authority in most organizations is
bureauaatic and is typically associated with the position one holds,
whether as sales manager, accountant, project coordinator, secretary,
'D
-.J factoxy supervisor, or machine operator. These different organizational
positions are usually defined in terms of rights and obligations, which
create a field of influence within which one can legitimately operate with
the formal suppcrt of those with whom one works. A factozy manager
may be given a ""right" to direct those under his or her control A sales
manager may be given the "right"' to influence policy on sales cam-
paigns-but not on financial accounting. The formal positions on an orga-
nization chart thus define spheres of delegated authority. To the extent
that authority Is translated into power through the assent of those falling
under the pattern of command, the authority structure is also a power
structure. Although the authority is often seen as flowing down from the
top of the organization chart, being delegated by one's superior, our dis-
cussion of the nature of legitimacy suggests that this ls only partly true.
The authority becomes effective only to the extent that it is legitimized
from below. The pyramid of power represented in an organization chart
thus builds on a base where considerable power belongs to fhose at the
bottom of the pyramid as well as to those at the top. Trade unionization
has of course recognized this, channeling the power existing at the lower
levels of the pyramid to challenge the pcwer at the top. To the extent that
trade union pcwer is legitimized by the n.ile of law and the right to union-
ize, it tx>o represents a type of formal authority. We will have more lo say
on this later in our discussion of "counterorganizat ions."
"11111111
~,,C.ONP\..3.C'I:,, ~~
--..-
Conbol of Scan:e R£soun:es
All orgaruza.tions depend for \heir conGnued
existence on an adequate flow of resources, such as money, mabma.ls,
technology, personnel, and support from customers, suppliers, and the
commw:uty at large. An ability to exercise control over any of these
resoun:es can thus provide an important source of power within and
between organizations. Aa:ess to funds, possession of a crucial slcill or
raw material,, control of access to some valued computer program or new
b!chnology, or even access to a special customer or supplier can lend indi-
viduals considerable organizational power. H the resource is fn scarce
supply and someone is dependent on its availability, then it can almost
certainly be translated into pow~ Sca.n:ity and dependence are the keys
to resource power! ·
When we begin to talk about the power associated with .resources,
attention usually focuses on the role of mon~ for money is among the
most liquid of all resources and can usually be converted into the otners.
A person with a valued skill, a supplier with a precious raw matenai or
a per.;on holding information on a new project opportunity can often
be persuaded to e,cchange his or her valued resource for an attractive
price Money can also be-converted into promotions, patronage, threats,
promises, or favors to buy loyalty, service, support, or raw compliance.
No wonder therefore that so much organizational politics .swrowtds
the process of budgeting and the control and allocation of .RnandaJ
resources. As Jeffrey Pfeffer of Stanford University has suggested, the use
of such power is critically linked with one's ability to control the discre-
tionary use of funds. It is not necessazy to have full control over financial
decisions. One needs to have just enough control to pull the crucial strings
that can create changes at the margin. The reason for this fs that most of
the .financial resources available to an organization are comm.ltted to sus-
taining current operations. Changes to these operations are usually inae-
mental, decisions being made to inaease or reduce current expenditure.
It is the ability to increase or deaease this flow of funds that gives powu
Hence, if a manager can acquire access to \U\committed resources that
can be used in a disaetionary way (e.g., as a slwh fund or to support a
-new initiative), he or she can exert a major influence over future organi-
zational development and at the same time buy commitment from those
who benefit from this use of funds. Similarly, someone outside an organi-
zation who Is responsible for deciding whether his or her financial sup-
port to that organization should be continued is in a position to exetcise
considerable influence on the polldes and practices of the organization.
Often, this influence is out of all proportion with the amount actually
 170
SOME IMAGES OF ORGANIZ ATION
lNl'ERESTS, CONFUC T,AND POWER
171
given, as organiz ations are often critically depende nt on margina l
funds to
aeate_room to ~uve r. Organiz ations often have a tendenc y to question was establish ed in the early 1960s to develop a new town
use their in an
slack m one year m ways that create commit ments or expecta tions old industri al area. A function al organiza tion was establish ed with
for the sepa-
rate departm ents (finance, law, adminis tration, commer cial develop
next yeu-fo r example , by giving a raise in salary that will be expecte
d ment,
to be repeate d next year, by appoint ing staff whose appoint housing , architec ture and planning , and enginee ring services) reportin
ments will g
to a general manage r, who reported to the board. A few years later,
need to be renewed , or by launchi ng a new program that staff will
wish to an
energeti c busines sman became chamna n of the board. He made the
continu e-thus lending conside rable.po wer to the margina l funder. cor-
poration 's chief legal officer the new general manage r and split the
The principl es that we have discusse d in relation to the use of
financia l now
vacant legal officer's post into two parts, creating the post of cmpora
power apply to other kinds of resource power as well. The importa
nt tion
secretar y and leaving the new legal officer with a nanowe r range
point is that power rests in controlling resources on which the organiz
a- of
functions. The corpora te secretar y's post was filled by a nominee
tion is depend ent for current operatio ns or for creating new Initiativ
es. of the
chairma n who had worked with him in a similar capacity at another
There must be a depende nce before one is able to control, and
such o-rga.--
nization . The chairma n and secretar y began to work closely together
control always derives its power from there being a scaxcily of, or
limited , and
the board eventua lly agreed that the sec:xetary should have due:t
access to, the resource in question . Whethe r we are talking about
the access .
to the board without having to go through the general manager
control of finance, skills, materia ls, or peISOnnel, or even the provisio
n of . The
chairma n involve d himself in the day-~ ay running of the organiza
emotion al support to a key decision maker who has come to value
one's tion,
often bypassi ng the general manage r, whose role became very difficult
support and friendsh ip, the principl es remain the same. The to
more perform .
Machiav ellian among us will quickly see how these principl es
point the nus situatio n came to a rather abrupt end with the suxprise resignat ion
way to a strategy for inaeasi ng power by creating depende nce
through of the chairma n in respons e to a controv ersy over policy issues.
the planned control of critical resource s. With
the appoint ment of a new chairma n who was interest ed in delegati
00
'° One's power can also be increase d by reducin g one's depende nce ng the
on task of running the organiz ation to the general manage r, power
relation s
others. This is why many manage rs and organiz ational units like
to have within the corpora tion changed dramatic:ally. The general manage
their own pockets of resowce s. The seeming ly needles s duplica r grad-
tion of ually establis hed his control over his departm ent heads, many
of whom
resourc es where each unit has the same underem ployed machine
, techni- had become quite powerf ul through the interven tions of the former
chair-
cal experts, or reserve of staff that can be used in rush periods
is often man. His approac h was to bring many of the function s that bad
been
a result of attempt s to reduce depend ence on the resoun:e s of
others. allocate d to the secretar y under his own control and to reorgan
ize
The idea of "stockp iling'' staff and expertise used to be a very
familiar other departm ental respons ibilities . For example , he split the fu:nc:tlon
s of
sign of organiz ational power. With the streaml irung that comes with
"cost the architec ture and plannin g departm ent, establis hing a new
plannin g
cutting" and efficien cy drives, and the possibil ity of gaining the required departm ent and a new departm ent dealing with surveys . This
flexibili ty through "outsou rcing" or subcont racting, it has now move left
become the chief architec t, who had become a strong executiv e during the
reign of
less commo n. the previou s chainna n, with but a fraction of the departm ent he
once ran.
These structur al redesig ns were later accomp anied by further
changes
that in effect demote d the heads of the function al departm ents, and
Use of Organiz ational Structure, it was
not long before a number left the organiz ation, includin g the
Rules, &gulat ions, and Procedures secretar y
and the chief architec t.
Most often, organiz ational structur e, rules, -Althou gh these structur al changes we.re justified in technica l
regulati ons, and procedu res are viewed as rational instrwn ents tem1S,
intende d they were also .motivat ed by politica l conside rations relating to .issues
of
to aid task perform ance. A politica l view of these arrange ments, controL The inltial changes created by the corpora tion's en~tic
howeve r, chair-
suggest s that in many situatio ns they are best underst ood man were designe d to enhance his own control of the
as product s and orsaruza tion by
~ec:tio ns of a struggle for politica l controL weaken ing that of the ser,eral manager . The dranges introduc
ed sher the
Conside r the followin g e,aunple drawn from research chainna n's resignat ion w-ere pr.iznad Jy de.signe
that I conduct ed • ~ r regain conaol over po.,,.,,ern .J d ~ ~ e
d ro heJp du~ g-enenu
.rn,an-
on 'British. ..,.new' town." develop ment corporat n L - .h,.-a.-& S ~ ~
ions. T'h.e COl'pOrat :fon In

"''2 SC>M.B ll\llA.GES OP O l t . ~ ' T l O N
was part of a power play to linut the role and influence of other key
individuals.
The circumstances of this case may be unique, but the pattern is quite
general; organaational structure is .frequently used as a political instru-
ment. ~ ~ organizational differentiation and integration, designs
for centralization and decentralization, and the tensions that can arise in
matrix organizations often entail hidden agendas related to the power:
autonomy, or interdependence of departments and individuals.
Th~ tensi~ swroun~~ the process of organizational design and
redesign provide many msights on organizational power structures.
P~le and departments_ often cling to outdated job descriptions and
resiSt change because their power and status within the organization are
so closely tied with the old order. Or they learn to use key aspects of orga-
nizational structure for their own ends. Consider, for example, how job
descriptions can be used by employees fo define what they are not
prepared to do ("that's not part of my job" or "I'm not paid to do that!").
Rules and regulations in general can prove to be two-edged swords.
Take, !or example, the case of the old state-owned British Rail, where
employees discovered the power of Hworking to rule." Rather than going
on strike to further a claim or address a grievance, a process that proved
'D costly to employees because they forfeited their pay, the union acquired
'D
the habit of declaring a "work to rule," whereby employees did exactly
what was required by the regulations developed by the railway authori-
ties. The result was that hardly any train left on time. Schedules went hay-
wire, and the whole railway system quickly slowed to a snail's pace, if not
a halt, because normal functioning required that employees find shortcuts
or at least streamline procedures.
The case is by no means unique. Many oigaruzations have comprehen-
sive systems of rules that, as almost every employee knows, can never be
applied if the system is to achieve any degree of operational eH~veness.
What, then, Is the real significance of the rules? Although the.tr formal
purpose may be to protect employees, customers, or the public at large,
they also are there to protect their creators. • .
For example, if an accident occurs in a railway system, 1t is possible to
launch an investigation comparing practice against the rules t~ find_ who
or what was in error. Sometimes, gaps in the rules are found. Sometimes,
gross negligence is discovered. But often the ~ccident is no mo,~ than
what Charles Perrow of Yale University calls a normal accident, Jl\ the
sense that its probability is built into the nature of the system. The bxoken
rules that accompany the accident have often been broken thousands of
times before as part of normal work practice, since normal work is hnpos-
sible without breaking the rules. The railwaymen in Britain, like others
...
~.<:.o~CT.~~ -,......,.
who nave adopted the ffwo1:'k to nile" ?=ctice. dil!.aw~now a v,ea-p<m.
designed to control and possibly punish \hem could be used. \o c.anuo\
and punish othe,:s.
Rules and regulations are often created, invoked. and used \n ~ a
proacti~e or retrospective fashion as part of a power play. All bureaucratic
re~tions, decision-making criteria, plans and schedules, promotion
and Job-evaluation requirements, and other rules that guide organiza-
' tional functioning give potential power to both the controllers and those
controlled. Rules designed to guide and streamline activities can almost
always be used to bloclc activities. Just as lawyers make a profession out
o: ~ding a new angle on what appears to be a clelll"alt rule, many oiga-
ruzational members are able to invoke rules in ways that no one ever
imagined possible. An ability to use the rules to one's advantage is thus
an important source of oiganizatfonaJ power and, as in the case of o.rga-
nizational structures, delines a contested teaain that is forever being
negotiated, preserved, or changed.
Control ofDecision ProUMe$
An ability to influence the outcomes of
decision-making processes. is a weIJ-m:ognized source of power that
has attracted considerable attention in the mgaruzatfon-theoiy lilerllture.
In discussing the kinds of power used here, it is useful to distinguish
between control of three interrelated elements: decision prmtises, decision
proasses, and decision issues mu! ohjttlir1es.
By influencing decision premises one can control !he foundations of
decision making-preventing crucial decisions &om being made and
fostering those that one actually desires. Hence, the attention is devoted
to the control of decision agendas and to strategies for guiding or deflect-
ing people's attention to the grounds or issues defining a favored point
of view. As Otarles Perrow has noted, an unobtrusive or unconscious
element of control can also be built into vocabularies, structureS of
communication, attitudes, beliefs, rules, and procedures. Though often
wiquestioned, they exert a decisive influence on decision outcomes by
shaping how we think and act. Our understandings of problems and
issues often act as mental straitjackets that prevent us .&om seeing other
ways of formulating basic concerns and finding the alternative courses of
action. Many of these unobtrusive controls are "cultural" in the sense that
they are built into organizational assumptions, beliefs, and prac:tkes
about "who we are" and "the way we do things around here."
· Control of decision-making processes is usually more visible than
the control of decision preD'lises, How should a decision be made? Who
 174 SOME IMAGES OP ORGANIZATION
should be involved? When will the decision be made? By determining
whether a decision can be taken and then reported to appropriate
quarters, whether it must go before a committee and which committee,
whether it must be supported by a full report, whether it will appear on
an agenda where it is likely to receive a rough ride (or an easy passage),
the order of an agenda, and even whether the decision should be
disc;ussed at the beginning or end of a meeting. a manager can have a
considerable impact on decision outcomes. The ground rules to guide
decision making are thus important variables that organization members
can manipulate and use to stack the deck In favor of or against a given
action. i linked to questions of organizational structure. For example, many bat-
A final way of controlling decision making jg to influence the isslllS and
objwiues to be addressed and the evaluative aiteria to be employed. An
individual can shape issues and objectives most directly through prepar-
ing the reports and contributing to the discussion on which the decision
will be based. By emphasizing the importan~ of particular constraints,
selecting and evaluating the alternatives on which a decision will be
made, and highlighting the importance of certam values or outcomes,
decision makers can exert considerable influence on the decision that
emerges from discussion. Eloquence, command of the facts, passionate
0 commitment. or sheer tenacity or endurance can in the end win the day,
0
adding to a person's power to influence the decisions with which he or
she is involved.
Control of Knowledge and Infomration
Evident in much of the above discussion,
particularly with regard to the control of decision premises, is the idea
that power acaues to the person who is able to structure attention to
issues in a way that in effect defines the reality of the decision-making
process. This draws attention to the key importance of knowledge
and information as sow:ces of power. By controlling these key resources a
person can systematically influence the definition of organizational situa-
tions and can create patterns of dependency. Both these activities desexve
attention on their own accowtt.
The American social psychologist W. I. Thomas once· observed that if
people define situations as real, they are real in their consequences. Many
skillful organizational politicians put this dictwn into practice on a daily
basis by conlff>lling in!ormation flows and the knowledge that is made
available to different people, thereby influencing their perception of
sib.iations and hence the "Ways they act in relation to those situations.
Lh.ese. poU.li.clans a%e oft:en known. as ""gatekeep~,- operdng and clOG1lng
INI'ERESTS, CONFLICT, AND POWER 175
channels of communication and filtering. summarizing, analyzing, and
thus shaping knowledge in acco¢ance with a view of the world that
favors their interests. Many aspects of organizational structure, especially
hietarchy and departmental divisions, influence how Information flows
and axe readily used by unofficial gatekeepers to advance their own ends.
Even by the simple process of slowing down or accelerating particular
information flows, thus making knowledge available in a timely manner
or too late for It to be of use to its recipients, the gatekeeper can wield
considerable power.
Often, the quest for control of information in an organization is
tles have been fought over the control and use of centralized computer
systems because control of. the computer often cames with it control
over information flows and the design of .Information systems. The
power of many finance and other specialist .Information processing
departments is often tied up with this fact. Fm.ance staff are important
not only because they control resources but because they also define
and control information about the use of resoun:es. By influencing the
design of budgeting and cost-control information systems they are able
to influence what is perceived as being important within the organiza-
tion both on the part of those who use the information as a basis for
control and among those who are subject lo these controls. Just as deci-
sion-making premises influence the kind of decisions that are made, the
hidden and sometimes unquestioned asswnptions that are built into the
design of infonnation systems can be of crucial importance in structur-
ing day-to-day activity.
Many of the hot issues regarding the merits and problems of micro-
processing hinge on the question of power. The new information pro-
cessing technology creates the possibility of multiple points of access to
common databases and the possibility of loc:al rather than centralized
information systems. In principle, the technology can be used to increase
the power of those at the periphety or local levels of the organization by
providing them with more comprehensive, immediate, and relevant data
relating to their work, facilitating self-control rather than centralized
control. In practice, the technology is often used to sustain or to increase
power at the center. The designers and users of such systems have been
acutely aware of the power in information. decentralizing certain activi-
ties while centralizJng ongoing survei1lance over their performance. Thus
executives in reznore parts of the world, airline reservation staffin unsu-
pervlsed offices, and -workers on the faclozy Boor per:Forzn under llz~
watchful eye of the cosnputtz;. k."h.ic.h .reports .ab:nos~ ~ . 1 2 2 0 ~ n:,- so.a,~
one CJJr" so.me _p,oLn~ a t ~ e h e ~ c , , F , t h ~ ~ - u ~ ~~
....
 J: :,t5 ~ D d A . C ' E S OP O"litJC~"TI.ON
Besides shaping definitions of organizational realities or exettising
control, knowledge and infon:nation can be used to weave patterns of
dependency. By possessing the right information at the right time, by
having exclusive access to key data, or by simply demonstntlng the abil-
ity to marshal and synthesize facts in an effective manner, organizational
member.1 can increase the power they wield within an organization.
Many people develop these skills In a systematic way and jealously guard
or block access to audal knowledge to enhance their indispensabili ty and
"expert" status. Obviously, other organlzational members have an inter-
est in breaking such exclusivity and widening access. There is thus IUSU-
ally a tendency in organizations to routinize valued slalls and abilities
whenever possible. There is also a tendency to break down dependencies
on specific individuals and departments by acquiring one's own experts.
Thus. departments often prefer to have their own specialist skills on hand,
even if this involves duplication and some redundancy of specialisms
within the organization as a whole.
Afinalaspecto fexpertpower relatestotheus eofknowledge ande.xper-
tise as a means of legitimlzlng what one wishes to do. "'Ihe expert"' often
carries an aura of authority and power that can add considerable weight to
a decision that rests in the balance or, though already having been made in
0 the minds of key actois, needs further support or justification.
Control a/Boundaries
Any discussion of power in organizations
must give attention to what is sometimes known as ''boundazy manage-
ment.n The notion of boundary is used to refer to the interface between
different elements of an organization. Thus we can talk about the bound-
aries between different work groups or departments or between an orga-
nization and its environment. By monitoring and controlling boundazy
transactions, people are able to build up considerable power. For
example, it becomes possible to monitor changes occurring outside one's
group, department,, or organization and initiate timely responses. One
acquires knowledge of aitical interdependenc ies over which one may be
able to secure a degree of control Or one gains access to aitical informa-
tion that places one in a particularly powerful position to interpret what
is happening in the outside world and thus help define the organiza-
tional reality that will guide action. One can also control transactions
across boundaries by performing a buffering function that allows or even
encourages certain transactions while blocking others.
Most people in leadership positions at all levels of an organization can
engage in this kind of boundaty management in a way that conbibutes to
~ .. c : : : : : c : , . ~ . ~ ~ " ' -
\heir pOV#er. 'The process is also an un-portan't. ~e:n't. oi n>art'j ~
tional roles, such as those of a seae.\ary, ~ ass\s'21n\, <ff ~ect.c=-
dinator, and of lialson people oi all \dnch. "People 'in such xo\es are oi\en
able to a.cq_uhe power that goes wet\. beyond their .formal s\a\us. rO't
example, many secretaries and special assistants are able to exert a major
impact on the way their boss views the reality of a given situation by
determining who is given access to the manager and when and by man-
aging information in a way that highlights or downplays the importance
of events and activities occurring elsewhere in the organization. One
of the most famous examples of boundazy management is found in the
management of the White House under the N'vcon administration , where
N'JXon's top aides Richard Erlichman and Bob Haldeman exercised tight
control over access to the president. In doing so, it seems they were able
to manage the ~ident's view of what was happening in the White
House and elsewhere. One of the main issues in the notorious Watergate
affair and the collapse of the presidency was whether Nvcon's aides had
allowed the president to receive the critical information regarding the
Watergate bwglaiy. Erlichman and Haldeman we.re experts at boundary
management, and their basic strategy for acquiring power Is found In
.many dHferent .kinds of organizations all over the world.
Boundaiy .management. can help integrate a unit with the outside
world, or it can be used to JsoJate that unit so that It can function .in an
autonomous way. The quest !or autonomy-by individual.,, groups, and
even departments- ls a powerlul feature of orgaruzalional life bec=ause
many people like to be in full control over their life space. Bomtdlll}'
management aids this quest, for it often shows ways in which a unit can
acquire the resources neces&a%Y to create autonomy and points to strate-
gies that can be used to (end off threats to autonomy. Groups and depart-
ments often attempt to incorporate key skills and resources within their
boundaries and to control admissions through selective recruitment. They
also often engage in what sociologist Erving Goffman has descnoed as
"avoidance rituals,.. steering clear of issues and potential problems that
will threaten their independence.
The quest for autonomy is, however, often countered by opposing
strategies initiated by managers e1sewhere in the system. They may
attempt to break down the cohesiveness of the group by nominating their
own representatives or allies to key positions, find ways of minimizing
the slack resources available to the group, develop information systems
that make activities transparent to outsiders, or encourage organizational
redesigns that increase interdependen ce and minimize the consequences
of autonomous actions. Boundary transactions are thus often character-
ized by competing strategies £or control and countercontro t Many groups

178 SOME IMAGES OP ORGANIZATI ON
and department s are successful in acquiring considerable degrees of
autonomy and in de.fending their position in a way that makes the orga•
nization a system of loosely coupled groups and departments rather than
a highly integrated unit.
Ability to Capt! With Uncatainty
One source of power implicit In much that
has been discussed above is the ability to cope with the uncertaintie s
that influence the day-to-day operation of an organization . Organizatio n
implies a certain degree of interdepend ence, so that discontinuo us or
unpredictab le situations in one part of an organi2ation have considerable
implications for operations elsewhere. An ability to deal with these uncer•
tainties gives an individua], group, or subunit considerable power in the
organization as a whole.
The ability to cope with uncertainty is often intimately connected with
one's place in the overall division of labor in an organization . Generally
speaking, tmcertainty is of two kinds. Environmen tal uncertaintie s (e.g.,
with regard to markets, sources of raw materials, or finance) can pro-
vide great opportunitie s for those with the contacts or skills to tackle the
problems and thus minimize their effects on the organization as a whole.
0 a>re technology as a means of converting organization al inputs into out-
N Operational uncertaintie s within the organization (e.g., the breakdown of
critical machine:ry used in factory- production or data processing) can help
troubleshoot ers, maintenanc e staff, or others with the requisite skills and
abilities acquire power and status as a result of their ability to restore
normal operations. The degree of power that accrues to people who can
tackle both kinds of uncertainty depends primarily on two factors: the
degree to which their skills are substitutabl e, and hence the ease with
which they can be replaced; and the centrality of their functions to the
operations of the organization as a whole.
Organizatio ns generally txy to reduce uncertaintie s whenever possi·
ble, usually by ''buffering" or through processes of routinization . For
example, stocks of aitical resources may be built up from different
sources, maintenance programs may be developed to minimize technc,.
logical failures, and people may be trained to deal with environmen tal
contingencie s. However, some uncertainty almost always Iemains, for,
by their nature, uncertain situations cannot always be accurately
predicted and forestalled. Then, too, those who see the power deriving
from their capacity to deal with uncertainty often preserve lhe.ir power
base by ensuring that the uncertainties continue and sometimes by
-.:nanipulalin g s i tuations so that they appear more unc:ert:ain than they
a.c:'tu.all.y a:re..
~"'l'ERESTS, CONFUCT,-AND POWER
179
In understandi ng the impact of uncertainty on the way an organizatio n
operates, we thus have an important means of understandi ng the power
relations between different groups and departments . We also get a better
understandi ng of the conditions tmder which the power of the expert or
tmubleshoo ter comes into play and of the importance of the various kinds
of power deriving from the control of resources discussed earlier. The
ecistence of uncertainty and an ability to cope with uncertainty are often
reasons explaining why and when these other kinds of power ~ e so
critical in shaping organization al affairs.
Control of T~clmology
Prom the beginning of histoty; technology has
senred as an Instrument of power, enhancing the ability of humans to
manipulate, control, and impose themselves on their environmen t. The
~ology employed in modem organization s.performs a similar .func-
tion.. It provides ifs users with an ability to achieve amazing results in
productive activity,. and it also provides them with an ability to manip-
ulate this productive power and make it work eHectively for their
own ends.
Organizatio ns usually become vitally dependent an SOIX\e form of
puts. This may be a factory- assembly line, a telephone switchboard , a
centralized computer or .record•lceeping system, or perhaps a capital-
inlensive plant like those used in oil refining, the production of chemi-
cals, or power generation. The kind of technology employed influences
the patterns of interdepend ence within an organization and hence the
power relations between different individuals and departments . For
example, in organization s where the technology_ creates patterns of
.sequential interdepend ence, as in a mass-produc tion assembly line where
task A must be completed before task B, which must be completed
before task C, the people controlling any one part of the technology pos--
sess considerable power to disrupt the whole. In organization s where
the technology involves more autonomou s systems of production, the
ability of one individual or group to influence the ope.ration of the
whole is much mo.re limited.
· The fact that technology has a major impact on power relations is an
important :reason why attempts to change technology often create major
conflicts between managers and employees and between different groups
within an organization , for the introduction of a new technology can alter
the balance of powe:c The introduction of asseznbly-Jin e production mto
industry, designed to increase rnanage.riaI control o=r die w-or.k pn:,cess, j
 180
SOl'wm JlldACRS OP ORGANlZ.A "TtON
also had the unintende d effect of increasing the power of factory-
workers
and their unions. In standardi zing Jobs, the technolog y standardi zed
employee interests in a way that encourag ed collective action, and also
gave employee s the power over the productio n process to make that
action extremely effective. A strike on any part of an assembly line can
bring the work of hundreds or even thousand s of people to a complete
halt. The technology is designed in a way that makes collective action by
a small group of people extremely effective.
The system of productio n based on the use of autonomo us work
groups and other forms of "cellular technology," however, fragments
the interests of workers. Work and rewards accrue to the work team as a
primary organizat ional unit The interests of an employee thus often
become more closely associated with those of his team than with those"'
of a general type of employee or occupatio nal group, making unioni2a-
tion and collective action much more difficult, especially as competitive
relations may develop between different work teams. Under the group
system, a withdraw al of work does not affect overall operation s unless
other work groups do the same. Hence the power of workers and their
unions tends to be reduced quite substantially.
The introducti on of new productio n methods, machines, computing
0 facilities, or any kind of technolog ical change that increases the power of
t., )
- beyond immediate issues and find ways of trading help in the present for
one group or departme nt at the expense of another thus tends to develop
into a hot political issue. Groups of employee s usually have a clear undel'-
standing of the power relaliQns inherent in current work arrangeme nts
and are usually ready to marshal all their resources and ingenuity to fight
changes that threaten their position.
The power associated with the control of technology becomes most
visible in confrontat ions and negotiatio ns surroundi ng organizati onal
change or when groups are attempting to improve their lot within the
organizati on. However, it also operates in more subtle ways. In working
with a particular machine or work system, an employee learns the ins and
outs of ils operaHon in a way that often lends that person considerable
power. Earlier in this chapter we discussed how machine operators were
able to use their knowledge of their machines to outwit the experts
attempting to set work standards. They were able to control the use of
their technology to improve their wages and control their pace'of work.
'This kind of process is used for many purposes in different kinds of work
settings every day. People manipulat e and control their technology just
as they twist and tum rules, regulations, and job desaiption s. Technology
designed to direct and control the work of employees frequently becomes
a tool of workers' control!
'IN'T'ERl!Sl:S.C C>Nr\...l.C"r.Jtt i.NO"P'C:1W'B: (t.. ,._ ,._
.
Interpaso ncll Allian~s, NetwOTks , and
Cont-rot of "lnfonnal Organizat ion"
Friends in high places, sponsors, mentots, eth-
nic or cultural affiliation s, coalitions of people prepared to trade support
and favors to further their individua l ends, and lnfonnal networks for
touching base, sounding out, or :merely shooting the breeze-a ll provide
a source of power to those involved. lbrough various kinds of interlock-
ing networks , individua ls can acquire advance notice of developm ents
that are relevant to their interests, exert various forms of inteipersonal
influence to shape these developm ents in a manner that they desire, and
prepare the way for proposals they are interested in advancing . The
skilled organizational politician systematically builds and cultivates such
info~ alliana!:S and networks, incorpora ting whenever possible the
help and influence of all those with an .important stake in the domain in
which that person is operating. Alliances and coalitions a.re not necessar-
ily built around an identity of interests; rather, the requireme nt for these
forms of informal organizati on is that there be a basis for some form of
mutually beneficial exchange. Successful networkin g or coalition build-
ing involves an awareness that besides winning friends it is necessary to
incorpora te and pacify potenµal enemies. It also .requires an ability to see
promises in the future. The successful coalition builder recognizes that the
currency of coalition building is one of mutual dependenc y and exchange.
The coalitions, alliances, and networks built through these processes
may remain highly .infomial and to a degree invisible. The coalition build-
ing may occur over the telephone, through old-boy networks and other
friendship groups, through the golf club, or through chance contacts. For
example, people sharing a meeting on one project may find that they share
an interest in relation to another area of their work and use .informal
exchanges at the meeting to Jay the groundwo rk for cooperative action
elsewhere. Much of the coalition building fotmd in organizatioruil life
occurs through this kind of chance encounter or through planned informal
meetings such as lunches and receptions. Sometimes, however, alliances
and networks are forged through various kinds of Institutionalized
exchange, such as meetings of professional groups and associations, and
may themselves eventually become institutionalized in enduring !onns
such as project teams, advisory boards, joint ventures, or cartel-like orga-
nizations. As is clear from the above examples, networks may be internal
to an organization or extend to include key people outside. Sometimes,
they are explicitly interorgani zational, such as interlockin g directorships
 182
SOME IMACESO F ORGANIZATION
where the same people serve on the boards of different organizat ions.
In
all networks , so~e players ma~ ta1ce an active central rote, and others may
operate at the fringes. Some will contribut e to and derive power from the
network more than others, according to the pattem of mutual dependen
ce
on which the alliance builds.
Besides drawing power from networki ng and coalition building, many
members of an organizat ion may draw power from their role in the social
~etwo~k s known as the uwonna l organizat ion. n All organizat ions have
informal networks where people interact in ways that meet various kinds
of social needs. Groups of coworker s may make a habit of going
to
lunch together or drinking on Fridays after work or may evolve means
of
enhancin g the quality of their life at work. They may share similar ethnic
or cultural backgrou nds and have affiliation s that extend beyond the
workplac e. Informal group leaders may become as powerfu l an influence
on their network or group as any rule, regulatio n, or manager. In
a social, ethnic, or cultural minority may build considera ble influence
culturall y divexse workforc e, such leaders can acquire enormou s power
as -gatekee pers," "bo1mda ry manager s," lllld represent atives and inter-
preters of reality for the groups they lead.
One other variant of informal organizat ion arises in situation s where
one
member of an organizat ion develops a psycholo gical or emotiona l depen-
..... dency on another. 'This becomes particula rly significan t when the depen-
dent party draws considera ble power from other sources. The history
of
corporate and public life is full of examples where a key decision maker has
become critically dependen t on his or her spouse, lover, secretaiy, or
trusted
aide or even on a self-proc laimed prophet or mystic:. In the power-be hind-
the-thron e syndrom e that results, the informal collabora tor exerts a critical
influence on how the decision maker's power is used. Such relations often
develop by chance, but it is by no means uncomm on for people to rise
to
power by cultivatin g such dependen cies in a Machiave llian way.
ContTOl of Counterorganizations
Another route to power in organiza tions rests
in the establish ment and control of what can be called "counter organiza
-
tions." Trade unions are the most obvious of these. Wheneve r a
group of
people manages to build a concentr ation of power in relative ly~ hands
it is not uncomJn on for opposing forces to coordina te their actions to
cre-
ate a rival power bloc. Economi st John Kenneth Galbraith has descn"bed
the process as one involving the developm ent of "counterv ailing power."
'Thus. unions develop as a check on rrtanagen ient in industrie
s where
~ is a high degree of industria l concentra tion; governm
-regulator
ent and other
y ageaci..es develop as a check on. the abuse oC i:nonopol
y power,
i,.
INl"'ERESTS, CONFLICT , AND POWER 183
and the concentra tion of productio n ls often balanced by the developm ent
of large organizat ions in the field of distn1rut ion-for example, chaJn
stores often develop in ways that balance the power exercised by the large
producer s and suppliers .
The strategy of exercisin g counterva iling power thus provides a way of
influenci ng organizat ions where one is not part of the establishe d power
structure. By joining and working for a trade union, consume rs' associa-
tion, social movemen t, cooperati ve, or lobby group-o r by exercising citi-
zens' rights and p ~ g the media, one's political represent ative, or
a
governm ent agency~ ne has a way of balancing power relations. Many
people make a career out of doing this. Thus, a shopfloor worker may
spend a major part of his leisure time working for his union, perhaps rising
through the ranks of the union bureaucra cy to a level at which he deals
with senior managem ent face-to-face. A spokespe rson or advocate for
a
in a
way that mobilize s power bases both within that person's organizat ion and
within the wider communi ty. For many people at the lower levels or mar-
ginalized areas of an organizat ion, the only effective way that they can
influence their work life is through this form of COlll\tervalling power.
Consume r advocate s like Ralph Nader also illustrate the potential of
counterv ailing power. Nader and his colleague s have been able to exert
a
much greater influence on American industry by acting as critics and
champion s of consume r rights than they would have had as employee
s
of any of the organiza tions they have critid2:ed . Many socially consciou
s
lawyers, journalis ts, academic s, and members of other professio nal groups
have also found an effective route to influence by criticizin g rather than
joining the organiza tions that are the object of their coru::em.
The principle of counterv ailing power is also often employe d by the
leaders of large conglom erates, who in effect play a fonn of chess with
their environm ent, buying and selling organizat ions as corporate pawns.
More than one multinati onal has attempte d to counter the power of
its
competit ors or bargain with its host governm ent with the principle
of
counterv allfng power in mind.
Symbolis m and the Managem ent ofMeaning
Another importan t source of power in organi-
zations rests in one's ability to persuade others to enact realities that
further the interests one wishes to pursue. Leadersh lp ultimatel y involves
an ability to define the reality oE others. While the authorita rian
leader
atten1pts to Nsell, n -tell, nor force a reality on his or her subordina
dentocratJ .c leaders alloiv defirut:lon s of a sftuation
tes, 1nore
l'o evoJr,,e fr'DD1 die j
 ,_
vieTNSI oE others. The dea1.ocratic leader's Inllue:nce is far Ill.Ore subtle and
symbolic. He or she spends time listening, sununarizlng, Integrating, and
guiding what is being sai~ :making key interventions and swrunoning
hn.ages, ideas, and values that help those involved to make sense of the
situation with which they are dealing. In managing the meanings and
intezpretations assigned to a situation, the leader in effect wields a form
of symbolic power that exerts a decisive influence on h"ow people perceive
their realities and hence the way they act. Charismatic leaders seem to
have a natural ability to shape meaning in this way.
We will focus upon three related aspects of symbolic management: the
use of imagery, the use of theatet:. and the use of gamesmanship.
Images, language, symbols, stories, ceremonies, rituals, and all the
other attributes of corporate culture discussed in Chapter 5 are tools tha°i
can be used in the management of meaning and hence in shaping power
relations in organizational life. Many successful managers and leaders are
aware of the power of evocative imagecy- and instinctively give a great
deal of attention to the impact their words and actions have on those
around them. For example, they often encourage the idea that the oi:gani-
zation is a team and the environment a competitive jungle, talk about
problems in terms of opportunities and challenges, symbolize the impor-
0
V, tance of a key activity or function by giving it high priority and visibility
on their own personal agenda, or find other ways of creating and mas-
saging the systems of belief deemed necessaty to achieve their aims. In
managing the meaning of organizational situations in these ways, they
can do much to shape patterns of corporate culture and subculture that
will help them achieve desired aims and objectives.
Many oi:ganizational members are also keenly aware of the way
in which theater-including physical settings, appearances, and styles of
behavior-can add to their power, and many deserve organizational
Oscars for their performaru:es. We have all walked into senior executives'
offices !hat exude power in temis of decor and layout, shouting out that
someone of considerable influence works fhere. An executive's office is
the stage on which that person perfonns and is often carefully organized
in ways that help that performance. In one area we may find a formal
desk with a thronelike chair where the executive plays authoritarian roles.
In another we may .find casual chairs around a coffee table, setting a more
convivial scene. When one is summoned to such an office, one often
senses the likely tone of the meeting according to where one is seated. If
you are guided to a low-level chair facing a desk where the manager can
physically look down and thus dominate you, you can almost be sure !hat
you are in for a hard time. Situations often speak louder than words and
do much to express and reproduce the power relations existing within an
organization.
. -
~ - ~ c : T.. ~ ~
Appearances can also count. for a. gTeat. deal. "P<,,e e,uanp\e.,
""°"" ~\e.
in an organiza\l.on soon learn \he xules oi chess and a\her unvn\.\'<en
requirernents for succ:essful pNgEeSS \o blgber rarilcs. 1n some org;uu:za.-
tions, it ls possible to distinguish =uketing people, acx,ountants, or even
those who work on a certain floor according to their choice of fashion and
general demeanor. Many aspiring young executives quickly leun the
value of carrying the Wall Stnet ]ounuJI to work and ensuring that it is
always visible, even if they never actually manage to read it. Some people
symbolize their activity with paper-strewn desks, and others demonstrate
their control and mastery of their work with a desk where no trace of
paper is ever seen. In organizational contexts, there is usually more to
appearance than meets the eye.
Style also counts. It is amazing how you can symboli7.e power by being
a couple of .minutes late for that all-important meeting where ev.eryone
depends on your presence or how v.isi'"billty in certain situations can
enhance your status. For example, in many o.rganizations, senior execu-
tives dramatize their presence at high-profile events but fade into the
woodwork at low-status functions. It is reported that in the White House
people often dramatize their access to the president by making sure they
amve at least haH an hour early so that others can see that they are seeing
the president. Access to the president 1s itseH both a reJlection and a
source of power, but if others know that you have such access, it can usu-
ally be used to acquire even more power. Those who are aware of how
symbolism can enhance power often spend a great deal of time dramatiz-
ing their work, using "'Impression management" to influence the systems
of meaning surrounding them and their activities.
Finally, we must note the skills of"gamesmanship.-The organizational
game player comes Jn many forms. Sometimes, he Is reckless and ruthless,
·shooting from the hip,• engaging in boardroom brawls, and never miss--
ing an opportunity to intimidate others. Other kinds of game players may
be more crafty and low profile, shaping key impressions at every tum.
In seeing organization-with its rewards of success, status, power, and
influence-as a game to be played according to their own sets of unwrit-
ten rules, o.rganizational game players often have a significant influence
on the structure of power relations.
Gmdn and the Managnnmt
of Gender Relations
It often makes a great deal of difference i£
you're a man or a woman! Many organizations are dominated by
gender-related values that bias organizational life in favor of one
sex over another. Thus, as many feminist writers have emphasized,
 186 SOME !MACES OF ORGANIZATION INTcRESTS, CONFUCT,ANO POWER 187

organizations often segment opportunity structures and job markets in

ways that enable men to achieve positions of prestige and power more RelalioM between men and women are frequently shaped by predefined
easily than women. It is sometimes called the nglass celling" eHect. stereotypes and images as to how they are expected to behave. Here are
Women can see opportunities at the top of their organizations, but the some o( the common traits traditionally associated with being male and
female in Western society:
path is often blocked by gender biases. These biases also shape how orga-
nizational reality is created and sustained on a day-to-day basis. This is
most obvious in situations of open disc,;imination and various forms of ~ MDle Sln-r.otype ~ Fnnal~ S!Lrmtype
sexual harassment but often pervades the culture of an organization in a Logical Intuitive
way that is much less visible. Rational Emotional
Consider, for example, some of the links between gender stereo-
Aggressive Submissive
types and traditional principles of organization. Exluoit 6.4 counterposes
a series of characteristics that are often used to differentiate between male Exploitative Empathic
and female. The links between the male stereotype and the values that Strategic: Spontaneous
dominate many ideas about the nature of organization are striking. Independent Nurturing
Organizations are often encouraged to be rational, analytical, strategic, Competitive Cooperative
decision-oriented, tough, and aggressive, and so are men. This has impor- HA leader and decision maker" "A loyal supporter and follower"
tant implications for women who wish to operate in this kind of world,
for insofar as they attempt to foster these values, lhey are often seen as
breaking the traditional female stereotype in way that opens them
a Under the influence of !he •gender revolution,• these stereotypes are now
in flux and transition.
to criticism (e.g~ for being uoverly assertiven and utrying to play a male
C role"). Of course, in organizations that cultivate values that are closer to
0,
those of the female stereotype, women can have an advantage, reversing Exhibit6.4 "D'adition.al Male and Female Steneotypes
the traditional imbalance.
These and other gender biases are also found in the language, rituals,
myths, stories, and other modes of symbolism that shape an organiza- Consider the following situation, drawn .from :research conducted by
tion's culture. General conversation and day-to-day ritual can serve to my colleague Deborah Sheppard:
include or to exclude and is sometimes constructed to achieve this end. A Susan Jones is a marketing research manager in a male-dominated
lone man or woman can quickly feel outnumbered or "out on a limb" industry. She frequently has to give presentations to her male colleagues
when othe:rn talk about matters that this individual cannot share or when and feels a need to ensure that she "blends in" by managing her appear·
language and jokes assume a derogatocy form. Such people can miss ance and behavior so that conventional expectations and norms relating
important conversation by not being in the same locker room and can be to sex roles are maintained. She strives to be "credible" while I10t overly
subjected to all kinds of subtle degradation through the stories and myths challenging the status quo and monitors herself on a continuing basis. She
that ruculate on the organizational grapevine. All the factors shaping is particularly careful not to act in a masculine way, and much of her
corporate culture discussed in Chapter 5 are relevant for understanding #impression management" rests In avoiding giving offense because she is
the gender realities constni.cted in an organization. They also identify the a woman. In her oral presentations she tries to demonstrate competence
means through which a person can begin to counter and reshape the while avoiding being assertive. She stands in the same place rather than
power relations thus produced. engaging in the more aggressive act of walking arotmd, even if the pre-
The subtleties associated with gender often create different experiences sentation lasts three hours. She attempts to get her ideas across gently. She
of the same organizational situation and present many practical problems does not raise her voice, .finding other ways of emphasizlng critic-al points
for the way nte:n and women interact on a dally basis. Sometimes, the (e.g., using overheads) but being sure never to use a pointer. She avoids
difficulties created are so significant that they give rise to conscious and wearing pants or three-piece suits with a vest and is ·always ca.refuJ to
unconscious strategies for "gender fflanagem.ent..'' balance her znore Form.al atl::lre .vith a fezn.in.ine biouse.
 s o ~ u.....AGRS ~ o . t . c ~ ~
~.~~. ~~

Susan Jones works in a <nale-donunated reality and spends a. \ot of her

~ e living on other people's tenns. Ms. Jones knows exactly what sbe is "-s cmte \oob arourul. ~ ~\\<ma\. "'cn'\6. \.'I. \!!, ~ ' \ ' 1 . 'I<> \.a.-.~
doing: She feels that to succeed. in her organhation she must ....., to fit · dilieten\ ~ '\i\ wn\<:h ~ \ c n\1m1't,C t,U>Att tt.\a~~ = I > . ~ < > \
as best she can. -, m t>Opular ma\e~ 1!.ach can~ su~tu\ at ~ \ u \ , 'l.tt<tt<m\'f, 'I<>~
Many people would challenge her style of gender management \ ~ md s\\uatiorcs \nvo\ved.
and suggest that she should be more assertive and confront and chan -\ Some Faw~ Stn.ttg\e \
the status quo. Many women in o.......... 5
1.. timis do this V""' -u........ el ge
lik th • mal •e,-~ - 1 ,:rn:,.uv y or,
e eir • e anmterparts, adopt a variety of other roles £or managing Queen 'Ellzabelh l \Rulewilh a firm har.d, surrounding oneself as
fax u-poss\b\eby s~emen. Ma?gatet
gender relations, such as those illustrated in Exhibit 6.5. · Thatcher provides a modem example.
. But the point about the case £or present purposes rests in the fa61: that \ The Fust tady Be content to exm:lse power behind lhe tluon~ a
it shows how life in organizations is often guided by subtle and not so tactic adopted by many "corporate wives"' such
subtle power relations that guide attention and behavior in one direction as executive secretaries and spedal assistants.
rather than in another. To do a good job in a male-dominated organi2a- The Invisible Woman I Adopt a low profile and tzy and blend with one's
1
sunoundlngs, exercising Influence in whatever
tion, Susan Jones has to put much greater effort into accomplishing every-
ways one can.
day reality than her male colleagues do. The Great Mother Consolidate power through cuing and nwturlng.
Th~ gender balance in many organlmtions is changing rapidly as The Llberationist l Play rough and give as good as you get: be
gender and equal opportunity issues hit the political "hot list." Also, as outspolcen and always make a stand In £aver of
discussed in Chapter 5, the shift from hierarchical to flat. networked the role of women.
forms of organization is creating a major political shift that favors what The.Amazon I Bealeadercfwoaien. ThfsstylefsespedalJy
successful when one can build a powe:dul
have been traditionally seen as female styles of management. The ability coalition by placing like-minded women in
0 to weave "webs of inclusion," build consensus, mobilize insight and
-.J influential positions.
h\tuition, and pay more attention to "process" than "product" are ail part Delilah I Use the pawezs of seduction ID win over 1cey
of the shifting balance. figures in male-dominated organ!zalfons.
As recently as the 1980s, the best advice to women wishing to succeed Joan of Ale I Use the power ofa s1wed cause and mi5slmt to
in organizational life was to "fit in" and beat men at their own game. For tnnscend the fact that you are a womm and
gain widespmid male support.
example, Betty Hanagan's influential G~ That Mother Nerm· Taught The Daughter
You in effect offered a guide for playing the male-dominated game.
I Find a "falhu figure" prepared to act as sponsor
and mentor.
Many of the most prominent female leaders have also reflected skill in
succeeding within the male archetype. For example, Margaret Thatcher, Some Male Strategies
one of the strongest political leaders of the twentieth century, has been TheWurlor Frequently adopted by busy executives caught up
openly and only half-jokingly described as "the best man the British In fighting corporate battles. Often used to bind
Conservative Party has ever had"-and that includes the wartime women Into roles as a,nmutted supportm.
leadership of Sir Winston Churchill, a major hero and role model for The'falher Often used to win the support of younger woznen
searching for a mentor.
Thatcher. I Use of absolute power to get what oru: wants,
Now, a lot of the advice given women is to change the rules of the King Henry VD1
attiacting and dlscardlng female supportm
game. Switch the archetype. In a networked as opposed to hierarcltlcal accordlrtg to their usefulness.
world, new skills and competencies are needed. The charactfflStics of the Toe Playboy Use of sex appeal (bolh real and !magl.ned) to
female archetype have much to offer here. win suppart and favor from female coUeagues.
Gender politics are in a state of Oux. Everyone's power is shaped to A role often adopted by enculives lacking
some degxee by his or her position on the gender continuum, whether a mcne stab\e power base. \
1
male, female, or somewhere in between. We shall have much more to say
'Exhibit 6.5 Some Stntegies for the Management ol Cendet Re\alio~
about the nature of gender issues in Chapter 7, where we discuss the role
(C,onlmwd)
of sexuality and the patriarchal family in corporate life.

.:.~·
 190 SOME IMAGES OF ORGANIZA TION
Exhibit 6.5 (Continued )
The Jock I Based on various kinds of "display behavior"'
intended to attract and convince women of one's
corporate prowess. Often used to develop
administrat ion and support from-wome n in
subordinate or lateral positions.
The Little Boy
I Often used to b:y to "get one's way" in dlfftcult
situations, especially in relation to female co-
workers and subordinate s. The role may _talce
many forms-for example, the "angry little'boy"'
who tluows a temper tantnun to c:reate a stir and
fon:e action; the "frustrated or whining little boy"
who tries to cultivate sympathy; and the "cute
little boy" who tries to curry favor,. espec:ially
when he's in a jam.
The Good Friend I Often used to develop parlnershlp s with female
colleagues, either as confidants or as key sources
ofinlonnat lonandadv ice.
The Cltauvinist Pig I Often used by men who feel threatened by the
presence of women. Chanc:teriz ed by use of
various #degradatio n" rituals that seek lo
0
- as determine d by the impact of glaciation millennia before. One species of
00 undermine the status of women and their
contributio ns.
Structural Factors That
Define the Stage of Action
One of the surprising things one discovers in
talking with members of an organizati on is that hardly anyone will admit
to having any real power. Even chief executives often say that they feel
highly constraine d, that they have few significant options in decision
making, and that the power they wield is more apparent than real.
Everyone usually feels in some degree hemmed in either by forces within
the organizati on or in terms of requireme nts posed by the environme nt.
Given the numerous and varied sources of power already discussed,
these a~tudes present us with a paradox. How is it that there can be so
many sources of power, yet so many feelings of powerless ness?
One possible answer is that access to power is so open, wide,
and var•
ied that U> a large extent power relations bec:ozne :inore or less balancecL
Whereas some people ..::na.y be able to a.nass considerab le
personal po...ve.r,
1'"TER.ESTS,. CONFLICT, AND POWER
191
this is offset by the power of others, and even the powerful thus feel
constraine d. We will give more attention to this "pluralist" ' view later in
the chapter.
Another possible explanatio n rests in the idea that it is important
to distinguis h between the surface manifestat ions and the deep structure
of power. This view is linked with perspectiv es
organizati on to be
on
explored in Chapters 8 and 9. It suggests that while organizati ons and
society may at any one time comprise a variety of political actors drawing
on a variety of power bases, the stage on which they engage in their var-
ious kinds of power play is defined by economics , race, class relation-
.s,hips, and other deep-struc tural factors shaping the social epoch in which
they live.
nus view summons the idea that organizati on and society must be
under.;too d from a historical perspectiv e. To illustrate, let us examine
an analogy from the natural world. Suppose that we are considerin g the
ecology of a river valley. We can understan d that ecology in terms of the
-power relations" between the various species of tree, shrub, fem, and
undergrow th and the soil from which they draw sustenance . But these
power relations are underpinn ed by the basic structure of the river valley,
tree may be more powerful and thus dominate another, but the conditions
of this dominatio n are structurall y determine d.
Applying this analogy to organizati onal life, we see how underlyin g
structures or logics underpin power relations. A manager may control an
important budget, have access to key info:onatio n, and be excellent at
impressio n managem ent and be a powerful person for all these reasons.
But his ability to draw on and use these sources of power is unde:pinn ed
by various structural factors, such as intercorpo rate power plays or an
impendin g merger that will eliminate his job. Many powerful managers
have been the victims of downsizin g. S-unilarly, a factory worker may
possess considerab le power to disrupt productio n as a result of his or her
role on an assembly line. Knowing the way in which productio n can be
disrupted is the immediate source of power, but the ultimate SOW'Ce is
the structure of productiv e activity that maices such power significant . A
black manager may be extremely skilled in mobilizing ideas and valued
resources, only to find himself blocked by racial prejudice.
These considerat ions encourage us to see people as agents or carriers
of power relations embedded ln the wider structure of society. As such,
people may be no more than semiauton o.mous pawns moving themselve s
around in a game where they can learn to understan d the rules but have
no po-wer to change the,n. This pheno=en on ,nay expJain why even
poM'erful. often feel tha~ they have little real cho.ice.,
the
l"O ho~ dtey shoufd
 :192 N
s o ~ DYIAG ESOPO RGAN' tZ.An.o R. '-"P..
- ~ . C.O'Nn 1c:.:. "-NO 'YO'fflS

face some of lhese wider tules ?=1: . Vfu.om ?=?'-. ,

behav e. For exatn ple, a duel execu tive ntay
of the econo m.Jc condi tions that influe nce the sur- F~y , \here is \he em-po we:nn g aspec t <>i ~ 'to achle.'le iurthe i:
n
oE the game in terms
wishe s the Otgan lzatio n to sur- expeti .ence progr ess o-r succe ss, they are <>ften e
vival of her organ izatio n. Insof ar as she r can actually \ead
optio ns about what must Pn>gtess and. su~es s. 1n \lus way, a sense of powe
vive, she may perce ive herse lf as havin g no real ective has receiv ed consid erable attention in the
be done to ensur e its survi vat to more power. This persp
ment, whic:h
recog nize the 1990s as a result_of the "New Agen huma n poten tial move
'lrus view of the deep struct ure of powe r leads us to have access to all kinds of person al powe r that
class .relati ons in deter- ~ how indivi duals
impo rtanc e of factor s ~ch as econo mics, race, and can be unlea shed by feeling powerful.
ns and hence the kind of oping proactive
minin g the roles we occupy within organ izatio The appro ach emph asizes the importance of devel
access . It draws 1!tten - d and act on their world in a
oppo rtunit y struc ture and powe r to which we have -ean0o,,. ·• nun -sets that lead peopl e to see
other proce sses of social izatio n is most evide nt
tion to the way educa tiona l systans and that will produ ce the result s they d~.ite . The proce ss
ion to the logic of capita l ~>: where peopl e who believ e that they have absolu tely no
shape basic eleme nts of culture. It draw s attent t, tn situat ions
try, levels of emplo ymen or achiev e unbelievable
accum ulatio n that shape s the struct ure of indus powe r or ability .fight and win a small victor y
and distribution of bunge e-cord jumpi ng .from the
patte rns of econo mic growth, and the ownership things, like runni ng over hot coals or
lying fac:toxs in more detail in the fol- of succe ss becom es a transf ormin g fon:e as
wealt h. We will consi der these under top of a cliff. The experience s and
defin e the stage on which organ izatio nal memb ers one victor y can lead to anothe r. M.any o~t ion
lowin g chapt ers. They they realize that
of powe r to which one kind of experi ence in quite
act and mode rate the influe nce of the other sourc es communities have been transformed by this
has access. unexpected ways.

The Powe r One Alrea dy Has T1te Ambig uity ofPowe r

......
0 Altho ugh wehav eident i.ied numeroussoun:-es
'-0 Powe r .is a route to power , and one can often
of power , which are proba bly far .from being exhaustive, it Is dil.icult to
use powe r to acquire more. The biographies of many consummate politi- that it has a great
cians illustr ate this fact. Por exam ple, politic ians
within organ izatio ns and tie down exactly what the pheno menon is. We Jcnow
l patter ns of depen dence where by one person
of powe r to inform al IOU agreem ents deal to do with asymm etrica
in publi c life frequently tie the use es depen dent on anoth er in an unbala nced way, and that
begs its return in kind at a later date. Thus a mana ger or unit becom
where help or favor the reality of other.,
a strugg le with Y, knowi ng that it also has a great deal to do with an ability to define
may use his or her powe r to suppo rt X in that lead them to percei ve and enact relatio ns that one desires.
will be possib le to call upon simila r (if not more) in ways
when X is succe ssful it be understood as an
was on the line, and I Howe ver, it .!s far from dear wheth er power should
suppo rt from X: "Rem embe r last July. Your future eslation of deep-
Surely you11 now do a small favor for me?" interpersonal behavioral pheno menon or as the m.anil
risked every thing to help out. It .Is not dear wheth er people have and exercise
subtle than this, but the messa ge is essen- seated structu ral factors.
Often, the excha nges are more mous huma n beings or are simply carrier s of power rela-
the form of an invest- powe r as autono
tially the same. Powe r used in a judici ous way takes These and other
l on a rainy day. tions that are the produ ct of more fundamental forces.
ment and, like mon~ often becom es usefu wheth er power ls a resour ce or a relatio nship, wheth er
-pot characteristic issues -such as
It is also possib le to take advan tage of the honey and proces ses of societa l domination
s and sustai ns peopl e who wish there is a distinction between power
of power . The presen ce of powe r attract l, wheth er power is ultima tely linked to the control of capital
se the pow~ holde r's and contro
to feed off that powe r and actual ly serves to increa er it is important
to lend the power and the structuring of the world economy, or wheth
power . In the hope of gainin g favor, peopl e may begin en actual manife st power and poll!nt ial power --
way of thinki ng to to distinguish betwe those
buy into that person 's interes t and debate among
holde r uninv ited suppo rt or continue to be the subject of considerable
e on the same side. When the time comes for the power o,:gani zation. .
show that they'r interested in the sociology of
peopl e then actually ms aside, howev er, it is clear that our discus sion of possi-
holde r to recogn ize this intere st with active suppo rt, These proble
the powe r holder , with all kinds of IOUs comin g Into inventory of ideas
becom e indeb ted to ble sources and uses of power provides us with an
of susten ance and attrac- begin to decod e power plays and political dynamics
a play. Power , like honey, is a perpetual source through which we can
tion amon g fellow bees.
 195
INTERESTS, CONFUC T. AND POWER
50MB IMAGES OF ORGANIZ ATION
194
hip between
Organiza tion can be understo od as mini-stat es where the relations
our discus- Individu al and
in organiza tional contexts . like our analysis of interests and individua l and society is parallele d by the relalions hJp between
us with a working tool with which we can tion can be
sion of conflict, it provides organiza tion. The unitary, plurallit. and radical views of organiza
action in a character ized In the followin g tem,s:
analyze organiza tional politics and, if we so wish, orient our
politiciz ed way.
Unit4,y Pluralist Radial1

Inlnests Places emphasi s on Places emphasi s on Places emphui s on

Managi ng Pluralis t Organiz ations the achievem ent of the diversity of the oppositio nal
common objective s. .Individu al and group nature of
The image of organiza tions develop ed ;iliove contradi doty
, for The orgaruza tion is interests. The
reflects what is sometim es known as a upluralis t" frame of reference viewed as being organiza tion is ...class" interests. .
sources of The organiza tion is
it emphasi zes the plural nature of the interests , conflicts, and united under lhe regarded as a loose
in politi- coalition with just a viewed as a
power that shape organiza tional life. The t.erm pluralism is used wnbrell aof
des where battlegro und
cal science to characte rize idealized kinds of liberal democra common goals and passing Interest in
potentia lly authorita rian tendenci es are held in check by
the free inter- striving toward the formal goals of where .rival forces
play of interest groups that have a stake in governm ent. The pluralist their achievem ent the organiza tion. (e.g., managem ent
for a in the :manner of a and unions) st.rive
vision is of a society where different groups bargain and compete
Aristotle 's well-inte gnted for the
share in the balance of power and use their influenc e to realize
. team. achievem ent of
ideal of politics: a negotiate d order that creates unity out of diversity
hy stands in contrast with an older organic or largely
This pluralist philosop
. The unitary view pictures society as an Inte- incompa tible ends.
"unitary " frame of reference
synony- Regards conflict as
grated whole where the interests of individu al and society are Confli~ Regards conflict as ~
c and the a rare and transient an inherent and organlza lional
mous. This unitary view emphasi zes the sovereig nty of the state
service of phenome non that lneradlca ble oonfllct as
importan ce of individu als subordin ating themselv es in the
and the can be removed c:haracte ristic of inevitabl e and as
society as a means of realizing and satisfyin g their true interests
along with through organiza tional aHairs part of a widtt
common good. It is an ideology that has grown in importan ce
als should appropri ate and stresses its class conflict that
the developm ent of the nation-s tate and the idea that individu
manager ial action. potential ly positive will eventual ly
place the interests of the state above all else.
frame of Where it does arise or functiona l aspects. change the whole
The pluralist view also contrast s with the so-called "radical "
society as compris ing antagoni stic class interests it is usually structure of 60Clety.
reference , whlch views
s and held attribute d to the It is recogniz ed
characte rized by deep-roo ted social and political cleavage activities of that conflict may
influenc ed
together as much by coercion as by consent. This radical view, deviants and be suppress ed and
by a Marxian perspect ive, suggests that the interests of
disadvan taged
radical troublem alcus. thus often exists as
groups can be furthered in a substant ial way only through a latent rather than
of society that displace those currentl y in power.
changes in the structure manifest
able rele-
These three frames of reference (Exhibit 6.6) have consider character istic of
that shape
vance for understa nding organiza tions and the ideologi es both oiganiza tfons
managem ent practice. Some organiza tions tend to function
like unftaiy J
J Jand sodety.
~~t P_Olitical systems with the kind of pluralist poli-
~ • others as rival
lds where e
tics discusse d earlier m this chapte,:. and others as battlefie &hlbit6. 6 Unlt.azy; Pluralht, and Radfal Framea of Referen~
groups engage in ongoing warfare.
f'Conh;,u, ,,Q
j
 Z96 nON
SOlvlB ~C'E .S OP ORGA .NtzA -~=-='P<>W-. '\.'71
~
E>clu o!t 6.6 (Cont inued ) \he \hxee ai
names ai\en
~=
'Besid es servi ng as analy tical. tools,
Unita ry 0 gi.es. Thus , m.ma-ge:m 01: empl oyees may
Plunz list Radic al serve as rganl zalion a). ideo\o we all
let's work \ogel her'' or \hat"
Powe r uuge ly Ignor es the Regards powe r as a
encou rage the idea that "we'r e a team ,
Rega rds pow er" differ ent thing s, so let's talk abou t and resolv e our dlffeteru:es so we
role of powe r In auda l variab le. want
a key featur e of Nwe'r e at war, 1 don't trust you, so we'll have to fight
Organiz.atfo:nal li£e. Powe r is the medi um organ izatio n, but a ~ all"ga in" or that will deter mine the chara cter of the
at out Clear ly, the ideol ogy in use
Conc epts such as throu gh Which pheno meno n that she is mana ging a team and
autho rity, conflicts of intere sts Is unequ ally organizatio n. If a lllana gel' belie ves that he or
lead ~,a nd can ~ d e empl oyee s to belie ve that
this is the case, harm oniou s coop-
are allevi ated and distributed and of "all for one and one for all"
contr ol tend to ~ reso!Vl!d. The follows class eratio n with a three musk eteer s' attitu de
the radic al frame of refere nce provi des the majo r
prefe rred me.ans of Organi7.lltion is divlsions. Power may gain grou nd. H
izatio nal event s, then a battle -tom 0Igan i-
desai bing the view ed as a plurality relati ons In ccnte xt for inter preti ng organ
gies may emerge and be used
mana geria l of powe r holdl?l'$ organ mdon s are zatfona1 life is almo st ceztain. Thes e ideolo
as a mean s of shapi ng the organ izatio n to confo rm
prero gativ e of draw ing their powe r viewe d as as a mana geme nt tool
iii: ends. This, after all, is the role of
guidi ng the from a plura lity of reflections of with the Imag e that best suits sped y.
organ izatio n S01.ltt es. powe r relations In u:leo! ogy in organ izatio ns, as in societ
towa rd the societ y at large and ent appro ach to mana geme nt. If
Each frame ofttlerence leads to a differ
as closd y .llnlced to ging a team, one tends to expec t and dema nd
achie vei:ne nt of one belie ves that one is mana
wider processes tives and to respe ct "the right of
comm on Interests. that peop le rally arou nd comm on objec
of social control ge and the duty of empl oyees lo obey." Employees
the mana ger to mana been appointed. No
{e.g., contro l of for whic h they have
are expec ted to perfo ma the roles
ecxmom.ic power, more . Conf lict is seen as a sourc e of trouble and as an unwa nted
less, no
the legal system , ry mana ger is usual ly to elim-
- intrus ion. Henc e, the orien tation of the unita
and education). ever possi ble. Given tlus Ideology, there
inate or supp ress confl ict when
.kind of organizational politics dis-
is no room to recog nize or accep t the
gers tend to see formal autho r-
(1979: 2.M-388). cusse d earlie r in this chaptei: Unita ry mana
SOURCE: Based on B ~ and Morga n sourc e of powe r and thus rarely ackno wledg e the
ity as the only legiti mate
the mana geme nt process. Union s are
foun d in organ izatio ns that have right or abilit y of other s to influe nce
Unit aiy chara cteris tics are most often ge, and the pursu it of indiv idual intittest through use of
respect for mana geme nt's right to .seen as a scour of malpr actice..
deve loped a cohe sive cultu re base d on differ ent .kinds of powe r is viewe d as a fonn
that have a Jong and conti nuou s histo cy of pater - some what narro w and old-
mana ge, espec ially those Altho ugh this unita xy view may seem
e there are sharp racial or class dis- and influential and Is suppo rted
nalis tic mana geme nt. Orga niz.at ions wher fashi oned, it is often extre mely perva sive
rent categ ories of empl oyee, wher e the.re are stron g nt For exam ple, theories based on the
tincti ons betw een diffe by many theor ies of mana geme
-colla r work ers such as those found in and organ ismic meta phors discu ssed in Chap ters 2 and 3
divisi 011S betw een blu~ and while mech anica l
e there has been a histozy of con.met betw een emph asizin g the impo rtanc e of design-
man y heav y indus tries, or wher often encou rage this unita zy view,
the characteristics of the radic al ting the organ izatio n to achie ve comm on goals. Hence, they
mana geme nt and labor,, tend to .reflect ing or adap wishe s to bell.eve
up of white -colla r staff, particuJarly the unita ry mana ger who
.model. Organb:afions prim arily made provi de prima.ty resoUICes for of dlrec tion
oyee s to acqu ire consi derab le autonomy, often and share d sense
wher e there is room for empl that llll enter prlse ought to posse ss the unity
, the three models apply to differ- desig ned mach ines or In otgan lsms In the natur al
tend fo fit the plura &t mod el Sometimes that we find In carefully
organ izatio n. It is often a salut ary exper ience for a per- attrac tive ~ the i?ea ~ a
ent parts of the same world . The team idea is often much more
es to my organ izatio n?" By using somewhat chaotic political syste m that wishe s to move m many directions
son to ask, ''Wh ich frame of reference appli unconsciously take refuge In this
in Exhi bit 6.6 to asses s the general patte rn of interests, at once. Henc e, many mana gers often
the mod el prese nted
a usefu l initia l grasp on the charac- deal with politi cal realities.
confl icts, and powe r, one can often gain ream ideol ogy rathe r than
whic h one is deali ng.
ter of the political syste m with
 SOMli IMAGES OP ORGANIZATI ON
198
Also, unitary ideology can serve as a resource fm: a crafty manager
who recognizes that espousing the attitude that "we're a team" may help
create unity among divergent elements. By identifying conflict as a source
of trouble, the manager may be able to unite the rest of the organization
against those who are key actors in the trouble. This tactic is often used to
unite employees against individuals or groups who are seen as disruptive
elements in an otherwise harmonious and rational enterprise. The unil:aiy
frame of reference is a powerful ideology among the public at large, and
=agers can often use this public ideology as a strategy for mobilizing
support and achieving control in the pluralist or radical power plays that
characterize their organization . The fact that managers who at times
espouse the unitary ideology may not actually believe in that ideology
themselves can make it difficult to determine which ideology has a con-
trolling influence in an organization . However, the person who has an
awareness of the role played by rhetoric and espoused ideology has a
means of understandi ng when this form of power play is occurring. The
unitary manager is often a pluralist in unitaiy clothing!
The hallmark of the pluralist manager is that he or she accepts the
inevitability of organization al politics, recognizing that because individu-
als have different interests, aims, and objectives, employees are likely to
use their membership in the organization for their own ends. Manage-
N or she wishes to engage in assertive or cooperative behavior (Exhibit 6:7).
ment is thus focused on balancing and coordinating the interests of orga-
nizational members so that they can work together within the constraints
set by the organization 's formal goals, which really reflect the interests of
shareholders and others with ultimate control over the fate of the organi-
zation. The pluralist manager recognizes that conflict and power plays
can serve both positive and negative functions; hence, the main concern is
to manage conflict in ways that will benefit the overall organization or,
more selfishly, in ways that will promote his or her own interests within
the organization . The pluralist manager is, after all, not politically neutral.
He or she is an active player in the politics of organization and uses the
roles of organization al power broker and conflict manager to maximum
effect.
For example, the pluralist manager may seek ways of using conflict_
as an energizing force to counteract staleness and keep people Non their
toes." Conflict c.an encourage self-evaluati on and challenge conventiona l
wisdom. It may cause a certain degree of pain within an organization but
can also do muclt to slimulate learning and change. It can help an organi-
zation keep abreast of a changing environmen t and be a source of con-
stant innovation.
Tius is partlculazly true in group declsion-.ma king situations, where
the absence of conflict often p.roduces c:onfonnity and -groupthink. ." "Jne
INIERESTS, CONFUCT, AND POWER 199
existence of rival points of view and of different a.iJ::ns and objectives can do
much to improve the quality of decision making. Conflict can also serve as
an important release valve that gets rid of pent-up pressures. It facilitates
processes of mutual accommoda tion through the exploration and resolu-
tion of differences, often in a way that preempts more subversive or explo-
si\'e resolutions. Somewhat paradoxicall y, conflict can at times serve to
stimulate change and at other times help maintain the status quo.
One of the main tasks of the pluralist manager is to find ways of main-
taining just the right level of conflict. Too much conflict can inunobWze an
organization by channelil'lg the efforts of its members into unproductiv e
activities, but too little conflict may encourage complacenc y and lethargy.
1n the former case, the manager may need to employ conflict resolution
techniques or reorient conflict in more productive directions. In the latter
he or she may need to find ways of promoting appropriate conflicts, often
by making hidden conflicts overt, or pcrltaps by actually c:mating conflict.
Although this may at times help to enliven the atmosphere and perfor-
mance of an organization , it can also be perceived as a fonn of unwar-
ranted manipulatio n, with disastrous results for relations between
managers and their employees.
In approaching the task of conflict managemen t, the pluralist manager
is faced with a choice of styles, which hinge on the extent to which he
Although a manager may have a preferred style, all the different styles
are likely to be appropriate at one time or another (Exhibit 6.8). Even in
the realm of politics, contingency theory thus has an important place. an'
some occasions, the manager may wish to buy time through various kinds
of avoidance behavior. On others, head-on competition , collaboratio n,
accommoda tion, or compromise may prove more effective. While some
managers prefer to battle it out in a way that all can see, others prefer
more subtle fly-fishing techniques that depend on an intimate knowledge
of the situation and the skillful use of the right bait at the right time for
the right people. The choice of the style and tactics to be used in a given
situation is crucial, but unfortunate ly it cannot be explored in detail here.
Regardless of style, successful pluralist managemen t always depends
on an ability to read developing situations. The manager must be able to
analyze.inte rests, understand conflicts, and explore power relations so
that situations can be brought under a measure of control. This requires a
keen ability to be aware of con.met-pro ne areas, to read the latent tenden-
cies and pressures beneath the surface actions of oJWUlizatio nal life, and
to irutiate appropriate responses. In general, the manager can intervene
to change perceptions, behaviors, and structures .in ways tha~ .,.,;u help
redefine or redirect- conLUcts to serve constructive ends.
 LEADERSHIP
FOR THE
TWENTY-FIRST
CENTURY

JOSEPH C. ROST
Foreword by James MacGregor Burns

Westport, Connecticut
London

115
 The Problem with
Leadership Studies

Leadership studies is an emerging discipline devoted, as the name suggests, to

the study of leadership as it is practiced in different organizations and societies.
Most of the people who call themselves leadership scholars study leadership in
one academic discipline or profession. Numerous exampl~s abound: Bailey
(1988) in anthropology, Bass (1985) in social psychology, Hersey and Blanchard
(1988) in human relations/resources, Selznick (1957) jn sociology, Sergiovanni
(1990) in education, Tucker (1981) in political science, Whitehead an~ White-
head (1986) in theology, andZaleznik (1989) in business. By far, most leadership
scholars are in schools of business and write for corporate executives and business
students.
These one-discipline sch~lars are easily recognized because they almost always
put an adjective in front of the word leadership, such as business leadership,
educational leadership, or political leadership; and they strongly hold the as-
sumption that leadership as practiced in the particular profession they are studying
is different from leadership as practiced in other professions.
The same can be said for leadership practitioners-those who lead organi·
zations-and those who are responsible for professional training and development
in leadership. Most of these leadership experts are heavily involved in only one
profession either as trainers or as leaders, and by far the largest percentage are
in business organizations. Educational and political organizations have their share

11 6
r
J
LEADERSH
IP FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
experts, but they are comparati 1 . .
of such ve Yfew m terms of numbers and mflu-
ence- t 980s a cadre of academics tr ·
Jo the rejected the single profr : amers: and practitioners appeared on the
scene wh~ and practice of lead es~_on and single academic discipline approach
10 the stt~ ~-wdies to explain wi:7 ip. These people increasingly use the ten~
th
1eader-~IIIP .1f not an interdis . . ey do because the title connotes a multt-
Jjscipllnary 'rl h 1
hctp •~ary • approach to understanding and practicing
u h·p
1 • 1esc sc oIars ave maug d . . •
leaders h d d
. t both t e un ergra uate and d
' urate university prooramsO
•
in leadership
10 d1cs a d .h . gra uatc levels, and these programs enroll
s dergraduate stu. cots wit different academ1c • maJors
. or graduate students m ·
11
differen t professions. There
ti
. are 'also
· sever,1· I doctoral programs m . leader~ h'tp
th
studies throug~out e United S_ta_tcs that arc graduating academics who teach in
· ther leadership ~rograms, trammg and development professionals who head
~heir own consulting ~~ms or professional development programs in large or-
ganizations, ~nd _practittoners _who_ put leadership to work in many public and
ovate orgamzatio~s. ~he Umv_ersity of San Diego has such a program.
_P In 1991, the Untve~sity of R~chmond (Virginia) will inaugurate the first un-
dergraduate pr~gram m th_c Unite~ States leading to a bachelor's degree with
leadership studies a~ ~ ~aJ~r. It will not be the last.
Examples of multidisciplinary scholars who have written books on leadership
are still somewhat rare, but their numbers are increasing. Bums (1978) is probably
the most widely read. Maccoby (1981), Gouldner (1950), Greenleaf (1977),
McCall and Lombardo (1978), and Paige (1977) were other early advocates of
the interdisciplinary approach. More recently, Adams (1986), Cleveland (1985),
Ford (1990), Gardner (1990), Heller, Van Til, and Zurcher (1986), Henrickson
{1988), Kellerman (1984b), and Rosenbach and Taylor (1984) have used such
an approach. To some extent, Bennis (l 989a), Nanus ( 1989), and Peters (t 987)
have developed a hiorc generalized view of leadership that reaches across profes-
sions, although they \
are more noted for their studies of business leadership.
Conger and Kanungo (1988) and Willner (1984) used a multidisciplinary ap-
proach to study charismatic leadership.
An increasing number of practitioners are able to engage in leadership in a
variety of contexts. And an increasing number of training and development
experts offer interdisciplinary professional development prografs in leadership
for practitioners. Many of these people have graduated from the leadership
doctoral programs that tend to take a multidisciplinary approach to leadership
studies.
This new trend in leadership studies brings with it a promising breakthrough
in our understanding of leadership. The study of leadership has been mired in
asingle disciplinary view for most of the twentieth century; the leadership studies
approach allows scholars and practitioners to think radically new thoughts about
leadership that are not possible from an unidisciplinary approach.
There are many problems confronting leadership scholars and practitioners in
the 1990s. Some of these stem from the study and practice of leadership since

117
I 1''HE PROBLEM wr rH LEAD
ER

the 1930s · Those problems d's w

SHIP STUDIES

d
. ussed in detail in subsequen apte
i11 be isc overarching problems that lead rs,
h ee
t r
·
t ch
ersh·1
3

· I cussnfr nt in the 199 0s. Solvmg these ProbJ e111P

For the present, I . wa nt to •
• s must co1 dOrship studies as a senous academic are s
scholars and pract1t10Jnerment of ea e · remely im , portant to the pra t' a
• • bl ms is ext c Ice
1s crucial to the deve op these pro e
of inquir y. De alin g with
p in the tw enty-f i~t ~e ~: i~ e the themes that appear over and r
of leadershi ne at the begin o~e
These three problems act_ uaI Ym ~denly come on the sce
rud :~~:: out of the ferment gen~rated in leader~~g
this boo k. Th ey Ip
again in
Ra the r, th ey e: d ci·es in our understanding of Jeadersh· · 1P as
of the 1990s. h l 980s the ma equa
· · e ' d the transition from an industri'aI to a
g
studies dunnd fi d er the years, an
t .
• ~ e ne . ov . th Un ited Sta tes and other Western countries
it h~s bee
postindustnal paradigm in e

PERIPHERY AND CONTENT IN

THE ™PORTANCE OF
LEADERSHIP STUDffiS that writers on
e firs t pro ble m of lea der shi p studies has been the emphasi0s
Th th dership and
shi p hav e pla ced on (1) wh at is _Periphe:31 to e ~ature ~ lea ers
lea der 1d~as ?nd mformauon t~at lead
the con ten t of lea de rsh ip- the
(2) what l call order to
ers in par ticu lar pro fes sio ns or org?mzatlo~~ must know ~n
and follow dership scholars
lue nce one ano the r in a lea der ship relationship. Traditional lea with
inf e been almost tot.ally concerned
es the y hav e dev elo ped hav
and the theori or made 11

eri es of lea der shi p: tra its, per sonality characteristi~s, "born
the periph ss, contingen-
, gre atn ess , gro up fac ilitatio n, goal attainment, effectwene
issues
goo dne ss, sty le, and , abo ve a11, the management of organiza-
cies, situations, most part,
bli c and pri vat e. Th ese ped pheral elements are, for the
tions-pu ible in terms
e and cou nta ble , sus cep tib le to statistical manipulation, access
visibl
ilit ies , and usa ble to tra in peo ple in the habits of doing what
of causality probab
the right thing.
those in the know may think is s to seize
em pha sis on per iph era l cle me nts allows leadership practitioner
Th e and to believe
eth ing tan gib le in the ir gue st to define and practice leadership ers
som
nes s of the pre scr ibe d beh avi ors. That emphasis allows follow
in the effective rge of
d abo ut fol low ing bec aus e they can see leaders taldng cha
to feel goo y, the peripheral
zat ion s acc ord ing to scr ipt s written in their minds. Finall
org ani
ola rs to fee l goo d abo ut the mselves because these theories
emphasis allows sch me thods known to researchers and
usi ng the bes t sci ent ific
were developed ether the
d to the bes t log ica l po siti vis t framework for research. Wh
conforme p did not seem
es· and "re sea rch act ual ly dea lt with the essence of leadershi e
the ori
rly imp ort ant to the se res ear chers. Rather what seems to hav
to have been ove t it
nt ':a s tha t the res ear ch wa s based on empi;icaJ data and tha
been importa .
do ne acc ord ing to the tra dit ion al, quantitative methods.
was s are very
ano t?e r lev el, tra dit ion al lea dership scholars and practitioner
, On
con ten t of lea de rsh ip- wh at leaders need to ·know about a
rnte~ested m the .
s,o n, org ani zat ion , or soc iety in order to be influential in it. The
particular pro fes

I JS
 4 LEADE:RSR!P FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
tent of leading-the knowled
conu ht of as more important as ge that l~aders must have-is .al~ost alway
th 0 g
s
f 1 d' S a determinant of leadership effectiveness than
th e proces s o ea mg. uch things kn
. s in a rofession· . d
d
as owing the state-of-the-art theorie s an
practice p df st
uo er anding human behavior situations environ-
ntal stress, an uture' trends· h , ' ' •
me . . . ' avmg a grasp of the techni cal informattoo
needed man ?rt~!zationJ knowing the critical data needed to introduce chang
e;
and ev~n an m 1 1:e ~n erstand ing of what all these new ideas mean for
profession or orgamzahon one is leading-these are the real essence of leader the
-
ship, the s~ff that separates t~e real people from the quiche makers. The proces
s.
of leadership, tbe underStand mg of leadership as a relationship, the conne
ction
among leaders an~ ~ollowers-all these are far down on the list of ptiorities
that
scholars and practitioners must have in order to understand how to put leadership
to work.
' That this "perip?ery and content" syndrome .is so pervasive can easily
be
illustrat~d by countmg the number of workshops or seminars on the conten
t of
leade~h1p as 0_pposed to. the process; by analyzing the number of class hours
spent m ed~cational, business, or public administration programs on the conten
t
of leadership as opposed to the process; by paying attention to media covera
ge
of the content of leadership 'instead of the process; or by counting the numbe
r
of books or journal articles with leadership in the title that deal primarily
with
the content of leadership and not the process.
The upshot of all this is that leadership scholars have spilled much ink on
the
peripheral elements surrounding leadership and its content instead of on
the
nature of leadership as a process, on leadership viewed as a dynamic; relationship.
Most of the research on leadership has emphasized the same two items
-the
peripheral aspects and the content of leadership-and almost none has
been
aimed at understanding the essential nature of what leadership is, the proces
s
whereby leaders and followers relate to one another to achieve a purpose.
Many scholars have wondered why we have not been able to get a conceptual
handle on the word leadership. Stogdill (1974) and later, Bass (1981) collec
ted
and analyzed some 4,725 studies of leadership that Bass listed on 189 pages
of
references in his handbook. Stogdill concluded that "the endless accumulation
of empirical data has not produced an integrated understanding of leadership"
(p. vii). Bass, in his update of Stogdill' s Handbook, came to the same conclu
sion,
but ended on a note of optimism:
Some disparage the thousands of research studies of leadership completed with
the sup-
posed I.ack of progress. Ye.t, when we compare our _understand~g of leaders
hip ~.1980
With what it was thirty years earlier, we can agree with T. R. M1tc~ell (1979)
that · there
seems to be progress in the field. Theory and re~earch are developmg adnd mtiuc~
of wyhat
is being done is being used in practice. There 1s reason for contra11e op
nusm. et,
the challenges are still there for the years nhead." (p. 61 7)

Three years ear-11er,

. Burns saw little reason to be optimistic after analyzing
past leadership study and practice. He wrote:

I I9
THE PROBLEM WITH J.,ElµJERSHIP STUDIES

. d 1.s the medioc

rity or irresponsibility of so many of th
. d. . . . e rn
S 1
The crisis of leadership to ay t 1 crisis underlymg me rocnty 1s 1nteU e11
The fundamen a 1·ttf
• ea b out l ectuai
eadersh· •
and women in power.. •• d we know far too
If we know all too much about our ~ea;r:,js reJcvant to the modern age. (1978 :· We
fail to grasp the essence of Jeadersbip a ' · l)

, , . one of the most observed and least underst0

"Leadership," he concluded , 15 · od
phenomena on earth" (p. 2>· theme· We know much about our l d
In 1984 B returned to the same · ea ers
. ' urns l1'ttle about what leadership really is. He criticiz d,
he opmed but we know very as much time commenting · tr· · e
' " . on 1v1a1 persona]'
the media for spending twice ' ,, eo le who are "fascinated b _1ty
and tactical matters as on substance, newsp p . ifi Y httle
blunders'' or ''matters essentially lacking in substance or sign. cance," and
. · that is "perverse superficial, unfair, [and] often biased" (Burns 1
med ta coverage · , d s by "mass
1984 155-156). In sum, we relate to our 1ea er spectatorship
' pp. . • ,, ( 156) And why are these tendenc· d'
and personalism or personabsmo P· · . ,, . . . ies ts-
turbing? Because their long-run effect ~n.dc:?imes eff~~ti~e, _com:111tt_ed, col-
lective, and durable leadership in politics . and has , ,du~ _implications for
governance', (p. 156). Because these tendencies lead to a polttics ~rsonality o!
[rather] than of policy, program, authority'. ~overnance • · • , a politics that. ..
seeks votes by appealing to short-run, superficial, and ~arrow _nce~s and hopes,"
a "leadership [that] is classically short-run, unstable, 1 neffective, irresponsible"
(p. 156).
Bennis and Nanus (1985) complained that "thousands of empirical investi-
gations of leadership have been conducted in the last seventy-five years alone,
but no clear and unequivocal understanding exists as to what distinguishes leaders
from nonleaders" (p. 4). They opined that "books on leadership are often as
majestically useless as they are pretentious,'' and insisted that they did not want
''to further muddle the bewildering melange of leadership definitions" (p. 20)
in their book.
Smith and Peterson (1988) cited 451 references in their study of leadership
theQry and rnsearch. and they review many of them in the first four chapters.
They warned their readers: ''Cumulatively, the chapters .delineate the impasse
which many researchers of leadership have diagnosed in recent years, and which
has lead quite a few practitioners to conclude that research into leadership has
little to offer them" (p. 1).
My own view is that it should be no surprise that scholars and practitioners
have not been able to clarify what leadership is, because most of what is written
about leadership has to do with its peripheral elements and content rather than
':ith the essential nature of leadership as a relationship. If scholars and practi- ·
tioners have n~t focused on the nature of leadership, it should not swprise any
of us who are mterested in the subject that we do not know what leadership is.
. Thus, i~ the l 990~, it is . absolutely crucial that scholars and practitioners
mterested m leadership studies de-emphasize the peripheral elements and the
content of leadership, and concentrate on underst~nding its essential nature. There

120
 6 LEADERSHIP FOR 1'HE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
. 0 indication that anyone is •. · h·
,s ~ies if the books published tnXJ.ous to change the emphasis of leaders 1P
stU. tion At least twent s n 1989 and the early months of 1990 are an
ind1~:t o~e of the schola: an~~h books_~ere published in those fifteen months,
and Jicate the essential n tu or practitioners who wrote those works attempted
to exp . . a re of leadershi
'fhe reality IS that, as of 1990 h p. ·h
• ty what leadership • Thi sc olars and practitioners do not know, wit
d
certain in the ; 9905 T~s. . s uncertainty about such an essential question
rnu st e;. fi01. th t · ere Is no possibility of framing a new paradigm of
leaders 1P . • eh wenty-first century if scholars and practitioners cannot artic-
ulate what 1t ts t ey are studying and practicing.

DEFINING LEADERSlilP
·The second problem with leadership studies as an academic discipline and
with the people who do leadership is that neither the scholars nor the practitioners
have been able to define leade~ship with precisi~n, accuracy, and conciseness
so that peopl~ ar_e abl~ to labeJ 1t correctly when·they see it happening or when
they engage lil it. Without an agreed-upon definition, all kinds of activities,
processes, and persons are labeled as leadership by both scholars and practi-
tioners. The word leadership (and, to some extent related words such as lead,
leader, and leading) are used in scholarly and po~ular publications, organiza-
tional newsletters and reports, and the media to mean very different things that
have little to do with any considered notion of what leadership actually is.
The worst part of the present situation is that many scholars do not see this
inability to agree upon a definition of leadership as a problem. While there have
been some researchers who have taken scholars to task for not being able to
come up with.a definition of leadership, the large majority of leadership scholars
accept definitional ambiguity and confusion as something that behavioral and
social scientists have to put up with and work around. Indeed, as I shall argue
later, leadership studies as an academic disciplin~ has a culture of definitional
pennissiveness and relativity. One scholar's definition is as good as another's;
the third scholar's definition is as good as the second scholar's definition; and
so on for as many scholars as choose to give definitions of leadership. The culture
allows anyone to give a definition of leadership, and ipso facto it is as accurate
and acceptable as anyone else's definition.
There are almost no arguments about definitions in the literature on leadership.
There are almost no critiques of other scholars' definitions, and what little there
is, appears in the literature of the 1980s. There have been no criteria established
to evaluate leadership definitions. There certainly has been no heuristic devel-
opment of leadership definitions from one decade to the next so that for instance,
1
the 1970s definitions are more accurate and real than those of the 1960s. 'The
existing [leadership] literatures do not 'add up'· (Argyris, 1979)," Hosking and
~orley stated, , 'partly for the reason that diverse phenomena have been studied
tn the name of leadership" (1988, p. 89).

121
THE PROBLEM WITH LEADERSHIP STUDIES 7
There is surprisingly little discussion of leadership d~finitions in the liter~tu
In fact, over 60 percent of the authors w?o have wntten, on l7ndership sinr;~
about 1910 did not define leadership in their works. The~ is an im~ression th
one picks up from reading a leadership book, chapter, or Journa~ article: GiVinat
a definition of leadership will not do any good, ~mce nobody will P~ty attentio~
t
to it. Or, giving a definition will not matter, s~ce moS ~c~olars ignore their
definitions after they give them, so why should I give 8 de~mtion and then ignore
it in the rest of the book? Besides, doing research_ th at ~ based on definitio
1

will only cramp my ideas and opinions, cause difficulties for my statistica~
procedures and sample population and/or phe~omena, a?d create p~oblems When
I do the analysis and fonnulate the conclusions. Takmg defimhons serious]
only gets in the way of doing the research I need _an~ want to do. Y
Practitioners tend to be more intuitive about this issue because they belie
· "f th ve
they can accurately label phenomena as_ leadership ev~n ,1, ey ~annot define
the concept in words: "I know leadership when I see it. Th~ difficulty with
this approach, however, is that the phenomena that one person Judges experien.
tially to be leadership often are not evaluated as leadership by other people who
see the very same phenomena. As a result, the experiential approach to d~fining
leadership is no better than the ambiguous approach of scholars because there
is no agreement among practitioners on what phenomena should be labeled as
leadership.
In 1990, leadership is a word that has come to mean all things to all people.
Even worse; leadership has increasingly become a very "hot" word since about
1960, with an ability to produce a passionate reaction that draws people to it .
through an emotional attraction. Leadership has been "in" for so long, I cannot
remember when it was "out." University programs, seminars, conferences,
speeches, books, training activities, people, products, positions, and many re-
lationships (group, marriage, counseling, teaching, friendship, etc.) are called
leadership in order to present a positive image of these phenomena so that people
accept them more readily and voluntarily, and to attract people to them for the
purpose of selling them, dignifying them by putting them on some kind of
pedestal, or pushing them into the limelight when they might not otherwise be
. able to gain that light.
Part of the reason that leadership has such a powerful attraction is that it has
taken on mythological significance. According to Campbell, "Myths are stories
of our search through the ages for truth, for meaning, for significance. Vfe all ·
need to tell our story and t6 understand our story: ... We need for life to signify,
to touch the eternal, to understand the mysterious, to find out who we are"
(Campbell, 1988, p. 5). On an earlier television program, Campbell, in speaking
of the American Indians, said that myths are "symbolic stories that reconcile
for the Indians the harsh realities of life" (Moyers The Hero's Journey, 1987).
Campbell's understa_ndi_ng of myt~ology helps explain what has happened to the
c~n~ept of I~aders~1p m the Umted States. Leadership helps Americans find
s1gmficance m therr search for the meaning of life, helps them reconcile the

122
 riII i
I
•1

LEADERSHIP FOR THE 1WENTY-FIRST CENTURY

8
ealities of life. It helps people explam
i.jl('Sh r
. effiecttveness
. and concomitantlYf
a,
iJlOW 5 them to celebrate the people
• • who ac 1eve t at e ecuveness·, the tack o
h" h ffi .
eadershiP ~e]ps them explain _ineffectiveness and concomitantly allows them to
1 e certain people for that meffectiveness
bla(ll O I d hi . d
In the 198 s, ea ers p hel~ed the people of the United States understan
hat went wrong when ~he nation lost its domination of the world's economy.
W adership helped Amencans reconcile themselves to the harsh reality that th e
J_,eP • 1 b .
trnited States ts _no. onger num er one in the world. It also helped Amencans
derstand the s1gmficance of excellence. Thus leadership would be the savior'
un U'dS
the waY the mte tates would regain its lost power and prestige, the magic .
that would help restore confidence and bring it back to the number one spot
again- .
In the twenty-fil st ~cntury, the harsh reality may be that there might not be a
nuinber _one ~ountry m th~ world. _Is the mythological story of United ~tat~s
1 adersh1p going to reconcile Amencans to that possibility? What is the s1gmf-
·~ce of life if that scenario comes to pass?
1
In bis books and in ~he interviews with Bill Boyers, Campbell insisted re-
peatedl~ that correctly mterp~·eting the mythological stories was critical to ~he
well-bemg of the group or society and to the lives of its people. That interpretation
was the primary responsibility of the high priests and elders, who instituted
rituals to ~ake sure !11e correct i~terpretations were passed down from genera~on
to generation. Such is the case with leadership studies as a mythological narratrve.
It is the responsibility of the leadership scholars and practicing leaders (the high
priests and elders of leadership studies) to pass on an accurate understanding of
leadership to succeeding generations. Read in that light, the leadership literature
since the J930s has been amazing successf11l. It has generated a mythological
story of leadership that has been told over and over-again and that almost everyone
believes. Whether the stories are accurate and the interpretations correct are
different issues. I will have more to say about those issues in other chapters.
Whether leadership studies is considered an academic discipline or a myth-
ological story, the importance of understanding the true meaning of leadership--
having a clear understanding of the essential nature of leadership by agreeing
upon an accurate definition-is crucial to studying and doing leadership. A clear
understanding of leadership is crucial to the concept adding up-making more
sense-from one generation to another. A clear definition of leadership is crucial
to leaders' and followers' making a difference in organizations and societies in
the twenty-first century. '
The facts are that in the 1990s, the concept of leadership does not add up
because leadership scholars and practitioners have no definition of leadership to
hold on to. The scholars do not know what it is they are studying, and the
practitioners do not know what it is that they are doing. A high priority for the
1990s is to reach a consensus on a clear, concise, easily understandable, re-
searchable, practical, and persuasive definition of leadership.
And, finally, the leadership literature does not add up because there is no

123
 THE PROBLEM WITH LEADERSHIP STUDIES 9
that makes sense of the concept
. . h J of Ieatodership . th' h t Of
easdy recogruzab le sc oo the third theme m ts c ap er.
leadership , a comment that leads ·

A NEW SCHOOL OF LEADERSHIP? . . .

Of us interested m leadership 1s the fail
The third problem that besets tldlosel ' readily recogniza ble school of Ure
·u ers to eve opb3 ut leadership from the research1ead ~
of scholars and praca on
ership that integrates what Vie. ~ow a o chool of leadership that frame and
writings of scholars and practwone rs,k a s nse to people who want to ~ an
I understan ding of leadership which m~ es se ·zations societies ' and the wsOrld dy
. d th ept to work m orgam ' ·
Jeaders h1p an put e cone . . the introducti on to his monum
I Bums called attention to this problem 1D enta1
I study of Jeadership.

I Th . . h t h I of leadership, intellectual or practical. Does it matter that

ere is, m s or' no sc oo t' l J ders? Without
we lack standards for assessing past, present, and po~e? ia ea . . a P0 .~e1:uf
I
•
p h1'losoph'1ca1 trad'1tion, w1'thou t theoretical
and empmcal
. cumulation
. , without
· .guidmg
th
I concepts and without considerable practical expenence, we lack e v~iy found~tt.ons for
knowledge of a phenomenon-leadership in the arts, the academy, science, politics, the
profession s, war--that touches and shapes our lives. . .
Although we have no school of leadership, we do have m ncll abunda~ce and variety
tbe makings of such a school. An immense reservoir of data and_analysis and theories
has been developed. No central concept of leadership has y~t eme~ged. • • . I believe,
however, the richness of the research and ana1ysis and thoughtful expenence , accumulate d
especially in the past decade or so, enables us now to achieve an intellectua l breakthrou gh.
Vitally important but largely unheralded work in humanistic psycholog y now makes it
possible to generalize about the leadership process across cultures and across time. This
is the central purpose of this book. (1978, p. 3)

Unfortuna tely, Burns did not achieve his purpose, and none of the authors of
the hundreds of books, chapters in edited books, and journal articles on leadership
published in the 1980s and in early 1990 have, individually or collective ly,
achieved it either. No one has presented an articulated school of leadershi p that
integrates our understan ding of leadership into a holistic framewor k.
In doing research for this book, I made notes on 312 books, chapters, and
journal articles written during the 1980s (not all of which are in the Reference s).
I also have notes on five works that were published in the ear1y months of 1990.
Managem ent and administra tion textbooks were generally excluded from that
list (although there are a few exception s I felt were important , and thus included
them). If the chapters from such textbooks were included in the list, the total
number would be over 500.
I am certain that there are, again conservat ively, another fifty chapters and
journal articles from the 1980s that were not uncovered . There may be a few
leadershi p books that I did not find, but they would have to be very few in
number. If one wanted to complete the list by adding the articles on leadership

124
JO
LEADER8
1-J.IP Fon r.
fro.Ill hun~reds o~ popular tnagazi 'HE 1WENTY-F!RST CENTURY
00 rces ftom which to gath nes, there
s person leadership av '}, her data. And the would eastly .
be another 300 or more
·
p~nsulting firms, and
c entions/meeti
:1 :\~e from compute:~ are an~ther 200 or so unpubJishcd
~lllng and devel zed retrieval systems, dissertations,
co:,vh were wr'tt n~s of professional ass o~m~nt departments in organ
izatio
w ic . 1 en 10 the 1980s. The ociations, and personal contacts, a11ns, of
of leadershi~ generated in the l 98Q . amount of Written material on
the subject
The published materials on leade:t. staggering by any standard.
not nearly so numerous as thos fr hip from the 1950s 1960s
and 1970s are
(llany publ'tshed dunn · g those deee om th 1
d ' theles
e 980s, but never ' s there ·were
as those I could find from the peria es.d
I al
so made notes on those works, as well
on many of the journal articles ° 19
oo
0 n 1eader
to 1949. I did not read or make notes
shi h
and 1940s. To some extent this was ad , _Pt at were published in the 1930s
rnent problem and the difficulty f fl ~CISlon based on my own time-
manage-
:Much of this literature is well O nd1~g m_any of these article
s in libraries.
{Stogdill, 1974; Bass, 1981) an;~ m~~ z;d m the two leadership
handbooks
not feel it wa<i necessary to ~n ibb s (1969) lengthy analysis, and I did
Gibb, Stogdill, and Bass, : t roug~ all that literature again
1 . Having read
• 8
tu;.
well, even though I have not 0 the hteratu~e ~f the 1930s and
1940s quite
After ponng over those notes ted most of 1t dtrectly
dd . ·
it rat~re since
e .
t:
t rials I came to a st tl' an . omg several cuts in analyzing those ma-
1930 t~g conclus~on. There is a school of leadership in the
. . a as been h1dden by the
·

of the hterature as 1t 1s presented in the books h obvio us confusion and chaos

. , c apters, an d atti'c1es. under the
surface, I found a con~tstent view of leadership in the background
assumptions
(Gouldner, 1970) and 10 the meanings behind the words used in
the definitions
~d the ~odels: This ~chool c~nceptualizes leadership as good
management. I
will call 1t the mdustnal paradigm of leadership and will discus
s it in depth in
upcoming chapters. .
Previously, no one had been able to tie this literature together and
make sense
of it. If, indeed, there has been a school of leadership there all along
, but it has
never been articulated well as an integrated framework, it seems
to me that we
have an entirely new situation. Instead of criticizing leadership
scholars and
practitioners, individually and collectively, for not developing a
school of lead-
ership, we can now criticize them for not articulating the schoo
l well (for
confusing both themselves and us by not being straightforward about
the whole
thing) and then criticize-in both the positive and the negati
"~e senses-the
understanding of leadership embedded in the school's conceptual
framework and
its practice in organizations and societies.
Viewed in that light, a reinterpretation_of ~ums's im_porta?~ work
(197~) may
well be in order . With twelve years hindsight at this wntmg,
and with the
recognition of a previously existing but not well-articulated schoo
l of leadership
operating since the 1930s, Bums's real purpose may no_t have been
to c_onstruct
a school of leadership after having evaluated the past literature as
la~king o?e.
H1s, reaI purpose may have been to build a new school of leadership, having
.

]25
 lJ
THE PROBL EM WITH LEADERSHIP STUDIES
. ed hat he saw as confus ion and mediocnty .
. ly reJect·h· win a school o f. Iead ersh'1p that is all b
conscio usly or unconscious
in the study and practice of lea?ers
1
t is perhap s better interpr eted as re lit
unreco gnizabl e. In sum, Burn\~ w~~t constru cting it for the first time. con,
structing the concep t of leaders . ,p, ose in that way, nothing else makes se
While Bums did not express ~i.s 8pirp dy existed at the time he wrote his ho nse
if, in truth, a school of leadership_ t~:am view of leaders hip and build that i~~-0
th
He certain ly did not adopt e ~amsOf' 1 adership and his model of it based on
hl f1 k H' derstandmg e
s ramew or . . 1s un d' fferent from the traditio nal concep t as fou d
tha~ understan_d1~g wen: very t Yet in analyzi ng his leaders hip framework nl
n
··
agam and agam m the hteratubits of industrialism that are sti emb edded in 'it
re.
. 'fl t &. l · h' c •
am struck by the s1gn1 can urns was not success Lu m 1., attemp t to build
In the end, I have to say th at B • ·
a new school of leadership. Nevertheless his
.
_w~:~ 18 ex\re~ e1Y Import ant as a

transitional statement that has immense possJbibties to ea us toward a new

school of leadership. . i· . . ...
Be that as it may, the sad fact is that leader~h1~ tud1es as an academ ic d1sc1phne
did not produc e a new school of leadership I the 1980s. Only a few of the
authors who wrote the 312 books, chapters, ankl articles review ed in this study
made a· significant contribution to our understanding of leaders hip, b~ause the
large majorit y of them did not concentrate on the nature of leaders hip. Only a
few authors began to articulate a new school of leaders hip; the large majority
of them still embraced the old school of leadership, the industr ial paradig m.
The auth~rs of these books, chapters, and journal articles come from most of
the academ ic disciplines that have something to say about leaders hip: anthro-
pology , history, literature, philosophy, political science , psycho logy, sociology,
theolog y, and such applied disciplines as business, educat ional, health, military,
public administration, and communication studies . They also come from prac-
titioner commu nities that attempt to put leadership to work: profess ional asso-
ciation s, public and private organizations and institut ions, training and
develo pment personnel, and consulting groups. While I have not analyzed the
popula r media for this book, my strong impression is that the concep t of lead-
ership articulated by the professionals in the media and arts wou]d be the same.
These professionals include television, radio, magazi ne, and newspa per com-
m~ntators and reporters, novelists, nonficUon writers , playwr ights, artists , and
compo sers.
If this analysis is at aJI accurate, the conclus ion is obviou s: A new school of
leaders hip is as elusive in 1990 as it was in 1978 when Burns wrote bis book.
T~is _is .a proble ~ t?at must be solved in the 1990s as the people in our orga-
mzat1ons and societies prepare for the twenty- first ceJ:.1tury.

126
r
2

An Overview of
L_eadership Studies

It is almost a ritual for the authors of books and articles on leadership to make
two statements at the beginning of their works. The first statement goes like this:
"Many scholars have studied leaders and leadership over the years, but there
still is no clear idea of what 'leadership' is or who leaders are." The second
statement usual1y takes_the form of several paragraphs summarizing the popular
theories of leadership: great man, traits, group, behaviorist, and situational.
The first of these statements reveals indisputable evidence of the cultural
pennissiveness imbedded in the academic discipline called leadership studies.
It is pennissible for leadership scholars not to know what leadership is. The
second statement shows the cumulative state of the art of the discipline-where
scholars ~e as a group in the study of leadership-and the state of the art is not
good. Both statements show signs of a malignancy that has been, and still is,
very detrimental to achieving any worthwhile body of scholarJy knowledge about
the phenomena called leadership.
While I will document this malaise in Chapters 3 and 4, I believe there needs
to be some discussion of the disease prior to that exposition, so that the definitions
in the next two chapters can be put into a context.

127
 FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENru
LEADERSHIp Ry

14 UT TI-IE NATURE OF
O
''ENESS AB
CULTURAL PERMISSI"
LEADERSHIP h have been many studies of lead
idea that t ere . ers
The first statement repeats the t'll have no clear understanding of what
I . scholars s I bl .h
and leadership but leaders up 1 myself. The pro em wit the state
' · ' h statemen s made it, . •
leadership is. I have made sue h having 95 percent of the scholars
ment is not that it is inaccurate butt _atb, k chapter or article as if they know
'te their oo ' ' •
ignore the statement an d wn h I rs write as if their readers know what
what leadership is. ~orsc, m~ny ~c ~:nding is the same as their own. These
leadership is and their readers un erst to give a definition of leadership and
scholars generally do not even atte~~·ng 1 10 gain a clear
understanding ~f the
the reader often has a difficult time
author's view of leadership, f h' kt'nd of leadership literature leadershi
s a resu ]t of the Preponderance o t 1s lturated into a view '
. of leadership aP
A been encu s
scholars an d pracu·t·ioners have .. ,, d tion of leaders as "anyone wh0
wants ,t IS an
lo sayscholars no . .
and apract1t1oners
d . anyone
."anything td" L adersl11·p are no longer offended
1s so es1gna e• . d' e,· - whose scholars study a phenomenon they cannot
by an acad·d we1me
em1ct'f 1sc1p arc no longer offended by a profession . (usmg . that term
adequate1y I en I y. , . . .
loosely) whose practitioners do not know whal ii IS the_y are practicing. Would
we pul up with oenologists if 1hey did nol kn_ow ".'hat w1~e wa~? Would we trust
medical scientists if they were not able 10 1denufy vanous diseases by name?
Would we accepl musicologists who did not know the nature of a symphony 1 or
an opera? Or would we believe archaeologists if they were unable to identify
specific bones as those of human beings and not those of other mammals1
One could say, Those scientists are all dealing with things-objects that can
be touched or seen. Leadership scholars are dealing with socially constructed
reality, which cannot be seen or touched, but only inferred through the actions
of human beings. A better comparison, then, might be with other behavioral
scientists. Do political scientists actually know what politics is? Are anthropol-
ngists able to adequately identify culture? Do psychologists have a clear definition
of the psyche or the psychic? Do sociologists know the nature of an organization,
institution, or society? Probably not.
'.hus: \he poinl is well taken. Perhaps lhe basic problem of !~adership studies-
an ma_b1hty t? know and agree upon what leadership is-is pervasive in all the
behavioral sciences. Many behavioral scientists seem to be unable to define the
nature of the basic phenome~a they are studying and to agree upon that definition.
It may ~ell be that _the maJor _rea~on leadership scholars have this problem is
that so~ial psychologists, orgamzat1onal behaviorists, and political scientists have
had this same pr~blem. Leadc_rship studies as an academic discipline was born
wh~n scve'.al social psychologists, organizational behaviorists and political sci·
I d decided
ent1sts b to make leadership
. study a su bspec,a · 1ty. These • • ·
' d1sc1phnes had
a rea y een enculturated mto an academic frame that allows these scholars to

128
 It

(I;
!
'I

ANovERVIEW 15

·,;e with ambiguity in the basic understand .

11 transmuted that frame of refere tng of fundamental phenomena, and
th
th ~ this analysis is accurate, the b n~e to e neY: discipline ofleadership studies .
. blished a scientific culture wherem as~c problem is that behavioral scientists• have
esta they a11e not expected to clearly art1cu1ate
nderstandjng of what it is th
ao u ,.h something without h .ey are studying. It is acceptable for them tot
d · h h
"' is. Or often a deft avmg
reseB!thing •u fa clearly arti cu1 ate notio n of w at t a
so~e red by the' resea:cher b:1 on ~ ~hat something is given, but the definition
ble to research that something
js !gn~he articulated definitionca~se itthis not possi
usiJlg . bh . ' smce at something ' as. defined ' is not quanti-
stream e av1o ral . tists. .adoptec1the logical positivist framework
scien
fi able · Mainh h' h .
of res~arc ' w JC requued q~antification for valid ity and replicability, Another
f . . •·
.. riation on . the same theme 1s• the prac ce o· researchers' g1vmg a definition
ti'
Vlll•
to be quantified even
of whatever th ey are researcbmg that allows the subject·
ition actually describes
though they have no guarantee that the quantifiable defin
the reality the researche~s say they are studying.
studies hundreds of
Both research strategies have been used in leadership
defined leadership as
times, The firs~ was used, ~or instance, in studies that
kinds of behaviors that
influence behavior and then included in the research all
for example in studies
were not in0uence--oriented. The second has been used
kind of s;ategy, the
that define leadership as management behavior. In this
or collected from survey
researcher amasses the managerial behaviors, observed
r or three-factor model,
instruments, and puts them in some kind of two~f'acto
calling the entire thing leadership.
lem in researching
Of course, the easiest way to deal with the definitional prob
approach has been the
leadership is to not give a definition. This no-definition
the data in Chapters 3
most common strategy of aJJ, as will be obvious from
and 4.
this fundamental
I have neither the expertise nor the motivation to try to solve
a leadership scholar, my
problem for all of the behavioral sciences. Since I am
this book is an attempt
primary responsibilities are to that area of study, and so
difficulty of attacking
to address this fundamental issue in leadership studies. The
multidisciplinary subject
this issue is that leadership is, by its very nature, a
because it has important ramifications for more than one
of the behavioral sciences
theology, for instance).
and liberal arts (history and literature, philosophy and
subject from a unidis-
Yet, fhe great majority of leadership scholars study the
e is part of the overall,
ciplinary perspective. Indeed, I believe that this perspectiv
few· leadership studies
fundamental problem. The reality is that there are very
rians, management
scholars: Rather, there are anthropologists, educators, histo
social psychologists,
scientists,· organizational behaviorists, political scientists,
r~hip. Thus, the lead-
and sociologists who have developed an expertise i~ l~ade
literatures from these
ership literature is primarily a mixed bag of subspectahzed
ars be~an to approa~h
disciplines. n was only during the 1980s th~t some schol
lar usmg several dis-
leadership from an interdisciplinary perspective-one scho

129
 LEADERSHIP FOR THE 1WENTY-F/RS'['
16 ceN~
. h . . f)~r
. b t they are still m t e mmonty of those Who
ciplines to study l~ders hip- u
known as leadership scholars. . throughout this book is th ~e
One of the basic views pervasi ve . . li b' e categ .
• ti' ti t I dership studies is an interd1sctp nary sus ~ect of inquiry ol'ica1
Impera ve ta ea . . that scholar and . . . Wh
this perspec tive is taken senously, tt mea~ d h. n1 b practitio ners en
O studyin g it Can
gain a clear understanding of the nature of ea ers ip Y Y
the framework of several different disc_iplines. Those who s~dy leadershj frolll
an unidisciplinary perspective have bhnders on, and the ~lmders Pl'eveni {roni
. g what leadership is.. Those who flpractice leaderslu'p as helllif .
from understandtn
was different in the profit sector than m the non~ro t sector have blinders oit
and those blinders prevent them from understa mg what leadership is. ('I'h n,
nd
have to reiterate a point made in the laS t chapter, confused the content eyof
' · h' )
leadership with its nature as a relations 1p.
With those blinders on, scholars do research on phenomena they think
stitute leadership and then write about what they have found concerning ~on.8
P
henomena and the circular problem continues. Withou d d
t any clear conce 1 c
·
°
Pof
'
leadership guiding the researc~ tha~ has been con uc~ smce th~ 1930s, the
reality may be, and very possibly 1s, that much of t~1s research 1s not about
leadership at all. For instance, in the 1~30s many social psychologists became
interested in groups and started researching them to find out how they operated
In the process, they equated group facilitation with group 1eadership, research~
the equation in hundreds of studies, ~n~ de~eloped a group theory of leadership,.
The group understanding of leadership is sttll accepted and popular. No one has
ever asked, "Is facilitating groups leadership?" The nature of leadership as
facilitation has been taken for granted because, in part, social psychologists and
lat~r, other scholars have worn disciplinary blinders that automatically assumed
that group facilitation was leadership. Since about 1930, we have agreed that
facilitating groups is leadership because a large body of leadership literature has
assumed this, and no one has bothered to question that basic assumption. ·This
is dramatic testimony to the cu]tural laxity of leadership scholars in concep-
tualizing leadership. The ethos is: Anything that anyone proclaims to be lead-
ership is ]eadership.
Practitioners have done the same thing. On the basis of cultural imperatives
from Western societies and the particular organizations to which people belong,
as well as influences based on race, gender, religion, family, and professional
education, people develop an idea of what leadership is. They then do what they
think is leadership, and later make assessments as to whether what they did, and
what they thought leadership was, actually worked. For several decades prac·
titioners have, for instance, thought that certain basic traits are endemic to
leadership; that having a plan, aggressiveness in pushing the pJan, persistence
in getting it through whatever bureaucratic bottlenecks had to be gotten through,
single-mindedness of purpose, and a certain cleverness of styJe are what lead·
ership is all about. And many people have acted that way because they believed
it was leadei:ship. No one ever thought to question the assumption that such

110
iJI ovERVIEW 17

1i11"iors are indeed_ Ieaders~ip .. Such assumptions were not questioned because
i,e ctitioners had the~ organ12at10nal blinders on, and these blinders equated the
iri11ts listed above
p~ . , with leadership.
hi Again , th'1s 1s
. dramat1c
. test'unony to our
ural pe~mt~Siveness, ~ ch allows people to believe that anything they say
cu11 dersh1p, 1s leadership.
5
i ~early, this kind of tolerance has gotten us nowhere. While such an attitude
11111
yhave been accept~ble for som~ years while scholars were trying to determine
tJte nature of lea~e~hip by expemn~ntation and other scientific strate~ies, tha~
, d of cultural l,,x.ity has outlasted its usefulness. Scholars and practitioners of
tindersbip are no more sure of what leadership is in 1990 than they were in
tel9a30, and. that state
. hof affairs
. is completely unacceptable. This kind of ignorance
(rterallY
1
1gnonng t e 1ssue of what leadership is) has to stop. It is no longer
ceptable for leadership scholars to begin their book chapter or article with
actaternents sueh as "LeadershiP has been one of the most ' researched
' · in
topics ·
~anagement. Yet the research results have also been among the most disap-
pointing" (Boal _& Bryson, 1988, p. 10). Or "Leadership is one of the most
talked abo~t, _wntten abo?t, and researched topics in the area of management
and organizational behaVIor. A vast number of articles and books about the
Jeadership phenomenon have been written from a wide variety of perspectives
over the years" (McElroy & Hunger, 1988, p. 169). It is no longer acceptabJe
for authors to write such introductory sentences and then not do something about
the problem. It is no longer acceptable for leadership scholars to ignore the issue
of what leadership is.
Scholars need to attack the issue head-on. Only when they do that and reso1ve
the issue will their research make any sense or have any impact on how the word
leadership is used in both the scholarly and the popular literatures and in everyday
language. It is time for some exacting criteria to be employed in making decisions
about the nature of leadership. It is time for a reconceptualization of leadership
based on clear, consistent, and easily identifiable criteria that can be used by ·
scholars and practitioners alike in assessing whether some process or activity
qualifies as leadership. In sum, it is time for us to find out what leadership is.

MOVEMENTS IN STUDYING LEADERSIDP

The second statement that many writers on leadership make has to -do with
the history of studying leadership. These writers often begin their book, chapter,
or article with several paragraphs or pages on the different theories or movements
of leadership. These summaries are frequently boiled down to the great man
theory that was popular in the ear]y part of this century, group theory in the
1930s and 1940s, trait theory in the 1940s and 1950s, behavior theory .in the
1950s and 1960s, contingency/situational theory in the 1960s and l 970s, and .
excellence theory in the 1980s. (The last-mentioned movement is not as uni-
versally recognized as the others.)
These summaries of leadership theory movements are ritualistically repeated

131
 .M, ~~
-.P'IRST ce-,.,,o
'ADERSHIP FOR THE TWENTY
L E
'th
18 tbo ok wr ite rs. As WJ oth er thi ng s th at at
. ~ . Th e
eci allby tex to acc ep t the m as iac ts. ese move
r aft er aut ho r, esp . ents
by au tho kta les and rnrn
rep eat ed ov er and over, peo ple
f
:fn stu die s an d, Hke oth er fol
tol d us the y are s, t th

f: f:
d~ s hig h pri est s ha ve
are par t of the fol klo re of lea , nurs~e.
ed bec aus e ]ea schools of business, education
they are bel iev 0
then,) are par tic ula rly fond
of exp]a· ?g,
Wr ite rs of ma nag em ent textbo
an d pub~c admini s~r atio n (am w: on f to tlle se mo ve me nts in a chapter on ~In
g
act.
lea der shi p by devoting a pag e
or
al analysis of
. . . dif fer ent and mu ch mo re co mp lex . A cri tic rizj
ers hip . se oft -re pea ted fo1 mu las for catego h ng
qm te ts tha t the myths
Th e rea h~ t~ t acc ura te at all. Like oth er
the lea der shi p literature sug ges b ~ t ese
ear ch and the ory are . no sto nes We
leadership res lea der shi p the ory mo ve me nts ma y e the
oft -re pea ted nar rat ive s of
~a pp ene d.
hea r, bu t the y are no t rep res ent ati ve of wh at a~t uaJ iy
wa nt to
vio us tha t the st01y ts tol d m
su_ch a way as
In rea din g the narrative, it .is ob ola rs ha ve be en ma kin g progre
ss
ssi on tha t we lea der shi p sch
to give the impre th st0ry reads like
tan din g of lea der shi p. In exa ggerated for m, e
in ou r unders th st few decades
the beg inn ing , aro und the turn of the cen tur y ao<l e .fi~
thi s: In ~e rsh ip thought that
the twe nti eth cen tur y, the peo ple wh o kn ew ab ou t lea the
of
d a few wo me n) cou l~ be Iea ~er s. Bu t m t~e dep ths of
on ly gre at me n (an nd from
ssi on in the 19 30 s, som e bn gh t soc ial psy ch olo gis ts fou
Great Depre ssi ble but also
die s of gro ups tha t dem ocr ati c lea der shi p wa s no t on ly po
the ir stu ega lita ria n view of
eff ect ive . So the gre at ma n the ory gav e way to a mo re ial
pJe wa nte d to kn ow wh at essent
. mo re
g and aft er Wo rld Wa r II, pep
lea der shi p. Du rin go od guys"
s nee ded to hav e in exe rci sin g lea der shi p so tha t the ''
traits leader wo rld . When the
wi n the wa r and the n no t Jose the pea ce in the po stw ar st
wo uld tra its of lea de rsh ip, behaviori
not agr ee on the ess ent ial
res ear che rs cou ld 19 60 s to co nc en tra te on leader
ship
iou s dis cip lin es dec ide d in the
sch ola rs in var wh at combi• ·
avi or act , and so the y stu die d wh at spe cif ic behaviors in
as a beh
dership.
nat ion s pro duc ed effective lea not the
us stu die s, the sch ola rs fou nd tha t lea de r be ha vio rs we re
Af ter numero y added the
les tha t pro du ced eff ect ive lea der shi p, so in the 19 70 s the
on ly var iab t, and ma ny people
ati on upo n wh ich the lea der ship beh avi ors we re con tin gen
situ
se thr ee- dim ens ion al mo de1 s. Wh en the 19 80 s cam e around
we re ple ase d wit h the m_ore
fou nd tha ! the ir cou ntr y had tak en sec on d pla ce to oth er,
and Americans_ er theorists
nat ion s, cer tain lea der shi p sch ola rs dis cov ere d tha t oth
pro spe rou s tic framework, so
bee n abl e to pu t all the theories tog eth er in on e ho lis
had no t
shi p. Le ad ers hip pro du ces exc
ell~nt
exc ell enc e the ory of lea der
the y ~ack_aged the n traits (high
ion s bec aus e lea der s are gre at exe cut ive s wh o ha ve cer tai
org ani zat se, ho nes t c~m-
_tru stw ort hi~ ess , _ch aris ma tic per son a, vis ion ary pu ipo
ene r~y , co rre ct behaviors
ls) that hel p the m ch oo se the
mu ruc ati on, obsession with goa ition the
pro _c ess , mo del the wa y, ma nag e by wa lki ng aro un d, pos
(chall~ng~ the ollaborators,
am zat ion , ma nip ula te the cul tur e ' enc ou rag e the h eart , em po we r c
orgd · k • . sit uat ion s (mergers ,
sue to the kru ttin g) so tha t they do the rig ht thi ng in ke y
an

132
;,JI OVERVIEW
19
. temational economic compet'ti'
in ·1 t' b 1 . 1• ~1
. vo1at1 e 1mes) y facilit ti on, lower productivity ' consumer d1ssat s Jlac-
uon, 11i f ti a ng the work group democratically but forcefu Y·
The t~ ng o 1e.1ea~ership story (done in less fanciful form than above) is
rnisleadmg b~~use it gives the impression that our understanding of leadership
is more sophiShcat~ and advanced in the 1980s than it was in the 1950s aod
that we ~av~ ce~amly come a long way from our naivete of the 1930s. Such
progress is simp_y not the case. There are more scholars and practitioners who
think of l~adership as group facilitation in the 1980s than there were in the 1930s ·
Using traits as an explanation of leadership in the 1980s is as popular as it was
in the 19S?s. Aod the great man/woman theory ofleadership is as strong in 1990
as it was m 1890, Lee Lacocca is our Henry Ford, Malcolm Forbes is our J.
pjerpont Morgan, Sam Walton is our John D. Rockefeller, and George Bush is
our Theodore Roosevelt.
There a~e a number of leadership scholars, myself included, who believe,
with Hosking and Morley:

The potential value of the leadership concept can be realized only by taking it seriously,
The existing literatures does not "add up" (Argyris, 1979), pllrtly for the reason that
diverse phenomena have been studied in the name of leadership. Here it will be argued
that the concept can be made useful when used with greater care and rigor than has
typically been the case. However, this, of itself, will not be enough. Decisions must be
made about what kind of concept leadership should be. (1988, p. 89).

In 1959, Bennis wrote this stinging critique of the leadership literature:

Of all the hazy and confounding areas in social psychology, leadership theory undoubtedly
contends for top nomination. And, ironically, probably more has been written and less
known about leadership than about any other topic in the behavioral sciences. Always,
it seems., the concept of leadership eludes us or turns up in another form to taunt us again
with its slipperiness and complexity. So we have invented an endless proliferation of
tenns to deal with it ... and still the concept is not sufflciently defined. As we survey
the path leadership theory has taken we spot the wreckage of "trait theory," the "great
man" theory, and the "situationists critique,'' leadership styles, functional leadership,
and finally leaderless leadership; to say nothing of bureaucratic leadership, charismatic
1leadership, democratic-autocratic-laissez-faire leadership, group-centered leadership,
reality-centered leadership, leadership by objective, and so on. The dialectic and reversals
of emphases in this area very nearly rival the tortuous twists and turns of child rearing
practices. (p. 259)

In 1970, Jacobs made the same argument in a book he wrote on an exchange

theory of leadership:

Perhaps the greatest weakness in the leadership literature has been the striking lack of
precision in the use of the tenn ''leadership'' and probably even in what' constitutes the
concept. It is not surprising that the processes studied under the label of leadership have

133
 eADERSHIP FOR THE TWENTY-FJRsr Ce,
20 L N1'{jltr
. . s surrounding the measurement s that h·
1 , of cond1tton• which they have been emp Ioyed, indi ave bcc~
been quite varied. Ana ysis
• • r contexts [in , ' ] to be garrulousness, th rough coercivCates that
employed, and the s1tm111om1 " h I • . e .Po
what seem sic Wer
the total range extends fro m . d b the •'demand c arac en sties of in
st
to authority relationships c a?lis~e y. • · as different as these, . ii is not surpt~Clion~
. With 111puts 1s1no tL
provided by expenmenters. in the literature concemmg what 1 (:, 11at
. .I . ty of outcomes . ( 3 eader h'
there 1s a substantm vane . . that facilitate its practtce. PP· 38-339) s tp
precursors are, and the c<?ndittons
·- the following critique of leadership stud'1
In 1977, J. P. Campbe!l wrote .· m· es ctnd
presented it at a leadership symposiu ·
ft sfonning the study of leadership to a stuay f
We are in very grave dang~r o ..r~n cd tbe transformation has not already o o se)f.
report questi?nnaire ~ehav10\:~nd:nd too easy' and there are now many su~J~ull'lld.
The method 1s too quick, too P, al'd'ty ·whatevei·. (p. 229) ques.
. th· t possess no construct v I t
,
ti onna,re measures a · · · 'f b greater emphasis were ·
It would be advantageous for the field I a mu~ W given s1rnp1y
,. · Jeadersh1p phenomena. e need much tnore
to defining dcscnbmg and measuring .
' ' h are trying to expJam, not whether
. .
a pat11cuJar
,
discussion and.argument about w at we
theory has been supported or not supported. We need many more descnptive studie,~ that
11
attempt to develop reasonable taxonomies of what leaders n? foll?wers actually do When
they interact, not more correlations among se]f-report queSt1onnmres. (p. 234)

In 1978, Pondy presented a critique in a chapter titled "Leadership Is a

Language Game":
I find the concept of Jeadership "style" particularly disturbing. It connotes to me su-
perficiality of action, without either sincerity of intent or substantive meaning. (pp, 88-
89)
Nearly all theories of leadership identify only a smaJl number of strategies to choose
from . You can use either a democratic, autocratic, or Jaissez-faire style. You can em-
phasize either consideration or initiating structure. Or ff you really want to gel fancy,
Vroom and Yetton (1973) offer six different things you can do. Now there is something
profoundly troubling about this .... I believe that we have sacrificed the creative aspects
of Jeadership for its programmatic aspects. (p. 90)
For the most part, leadership research has limited itself to looking at socia] influence
that is of the direct, face-to-face variety. Perhaps this is why there has been so much
emphasis on personal style. But some of the most important forms of influence are remote
from the behavior being induced, (p. 91)

Mintzberg made some extended comments on the state of leadership literature

at a leadership symposium in 1982:

So let me say that I think the literature on leadership ls in great shape. But not the
"establishment" research literature, by which I mean the material that fills the refereed
journals.
When I ~rst looked at that literature, in the mid-1960s, I was frankly appalled: traits
pursued fnntlessly for decades, consideration and initiating structure being rediscovered

134
 I\
'I

µI o-VERVIEW
21
.
e research year after Year, risk
the t shi fts that were
iO t~ wJJat bas changed sin fo fi 1 60s? Every th eventually discredited, and so on .
ce
f>Jld 5}talI not name them r of losing all eory tl_iat has since
come into vo gu o-
d No ne that I can th ~a en with a
1111d l r to u: friends-has for me fall
eve
I d!lll tb;b~d its essenc e. Ev
me
en
nt
th
. e
of
Old
has
one s end ure
ip-
Ied a ~entral nerve of len de rshd to
11PP'°abe ond establish t VJ.ew~, that consid · . fiod in these chapters, intende
not
rtlove y come up te
pea edl y · Som etim es I th~rntion and initiating structure are t do
de!la--theY . t d e. mk I must be awfully dense: I
jus
ot get the ~om ' an neve~ havnew
n even die utles of the theories- 1 ir co nte nt-
nd ~c he d. Sin ce the be ;~ n: ; t~~.~ld-reveaJ the nature of the ver-
Jodding a de
era l at be1 ,t, and alJ too fl e seems to have been a steady con )
p t1CC on the periph ant. (p. 250
ten on the trivial and the irrelev
O

ge
Jn t 984, Daehler made these
comm .
ents at a leadership symposium:
82) pre scri ti
N vertJte]ess, Mintzberg's (19der , overstated as they may be, clearly sig
nal
I t e con
t the natur
he fact tha
ceptions of
e
it
of
and
lea
the
shi
m~
p an
tho
l ons
ds managemreent in hthe rea d
we use to searc Iea ersh1p
fit wen
l world does not
. and management.
our
(p. JOI)
k not onl our .
. .. Thus, unless we rethinsoc . conception s of leadership but also our as-
ptions about the nat
s~ll by necessity remain
WJ
ure
ob
of
scure
ial
anr~
{
e1ns m general, our attempts to refocus leader
incomplete. (p. 102)
ship

In 1988, Calas and Smircich

developed this en·t·1que:
mpty-
blems is the one proposed fol' the unfortunate Hu
Too often, our solution to pro rd with more
mp ty- "m ore horses 1 mo •men • " Wi• e propose rather than going forwa
re
t we not go
Du
me n (a techm cal solutio n akin to more of the same), tha
horses and mo re what it is we are doing how we
we sto p- to giv e attention to
forwHid at all, but that '
are doing it, an d wh y. for granted as we
wa y out of ou r stagn atio n is to reexamine what we have taken
One 202)
have produced the aca demic leadership literature. (p. them, and they
the aca dem ics do ing lea der ship literature. There are many of or
Consider
of the m, how eve r, hav e been overheard to say at one time
are smart. Almost all really know about the phenome
non?" . ..
se stu die s and wh at do we
another: "All tho claim they are
these sm art peo ple bea ting their heads against a wall? They
Why are
wh at the y are doing, yet they are redoubling their efforts and
not getting very far with er way to understand this behavior
[that is
. Th ere mu st be som e oth
trying even harder
called leadership]. (p. 214)

ins, after surveying the literature in 1989, wrote this negative

Finally, Watk
conclusion:
some of the majo.r theoretical J>?
rspecti;es
nce d with a bri ef sur vey of
This chapter comme ica ted a number of senous shortcomi~g
s which
powe r. Th is sur vey ind
view of these con~epts. ~ parand lacking
on leadership and ist
ticular !he
the tradition al fun ctio nal tic
are manifest in · 1 bem · pl1'sti'c , ahistoncal ' sta '
· g sim
• • wa s cha rge d w1U e
fiunctionahst account
ncy , wh ile neg lectin g bas ic concepts such as the class structur
in a sense of human age

135
 /...EADERSHIP FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENru ny
22
red "the history of research in this area .18
of society. In short, as Perrow has ~!untly ;ta 86). (p. 30)
one of progressive disenchantment. ( I98 , P·
•• I18t uld be quoted . Howev er they
co h t d th ' are
These are only a few of the cnttque s t 1 se 1~c c
Yd cm. They
some of the most forthright and strong, and that is w
It does
destro y the notion that the leadership Jiterature adds up an ma cs sense.
not. . t h . I
st0ry is O em~ asize t 1e ex-
Anoth er wa of telling the leaders hip studies
. 7 . f h
penme ntal, sc1ent1fic nature o t e rcsearc 1
I tl1at has been done smce 1930 . , thu s
. ~he
explain ing the dead ends that leaders hip researchers_ have. come up agam~t
· o f course , tirn t the experim ental •strateg y 1s a time-h
· t 1s, . onored " . ic
scientif
pom right
metho d and the fact that leadership scholar s have not yet discov ered the
wrong
stuff'' does not mean they are on the wrong track or headed . in, the
directi on. Resear chers like other human beings , follow one of hfe s most val-
ve of
uable maxim s: If at first you don't succee d, try, try again. This narrati
read in
leaders hip studies is a variation on the old Edison tale we all heard or
the right one
gramm ar school : that he tried countle ss filaments before he found
been
for the electric light bulb. Leader ship scholar s are like Edison ; they have
trying to find the correct mix of variables that adds up to leaders hip.
this.
The story, as told from the experim ental, trial-an d-error view, goes like
social
The great man theory of leadership proved unacce ptable by the 1930s, so
afhow
psycho logists began a new approach to studyin g leaders hip. They looked
of researc h reached
leaders hip emerge s and develo ps in small groups . That line
to large
a dead end when it became clear that the results were not transfe rable
looked
groups or organiz ations. Even before that, howev er, other researc hers
hip
for univer sal traits of leaders in order to unders tand what really makes leaders
red the
tick, but that effort was demoli shed in the 1950s by Stogdi ll, who compa
ictory and
results of numero us traits studies and found that they were contrad
hip
inconc lusive. So he and others at Ohio State Univer sity declare d that leaders
on of
should be concep tualize d as behavi or, but after years of study of initiati
or the-
structu re and consid eration , as well as of other two-di mensio nal behavi
nce.
ories, schola rs could not isolate key behavi oral pattern s that made any differe
.
There seemed to be no one best way for leaders to behave when leading
With that approa ch laid to rest, researc hers tried to determ ine what leader
again
behavi ors were ~he best in certain situatio ns. But that approa ch fell apart,
formu-
after many studies and dozens of conting ency/si tuation al models were
decisio n trees or
lated, when leaders realized that they would have to consul t
ns
wheel charts to find out how to behave. There were also thousa nds of situatio
studied , so leaders were left on thcir · own, which they
. researc
that . hers had not.
d1d not find very appeal ing, in view of the fact that situatio nal leaders hip theor)'
was suppos ed to have the answer s to all their questio ns abo t Iead ersh'ip behavior.
. 11 . h 1980 l d . u
Fina Y, m ~ e s, ea ers~ip_ scholar s repudia ted situatio nal leaders hip theory
and determ ined that• leaders hip 1s '. after all these ~als t b - bcr one;
• • • 1, es arts, emg num
.
so, really, leaders hip 1s simply doing the right thi'n g to ac1uevc exec ence. II That

136
ffi
oVERVIEW I \\
'I
23 \
Ot the rese arch ers had to find O t
111ea
arching exce llen t companies anduCEOWhat th ·
e ng11t thing is, so they set about
re~:erns, group facilitation strategies ~, and deve
pa leaders. loped lists of traits, behavior
' an culture-shaping practices for would-
be'fhe pom ' t of th' · e, of cour
1s narrativ se . .
·tecl so many time s to unc ove r the ' 18 not that leadership scholars have
f~en acting like scientists all this ti~: ~et s of
_leadership, but that they hav e
b osed to do. If one expe rime nt d nd
domg exactly what scientists are
sup~ until they find the combinatio ~~s not wor
11 k, the scientists go on to the
ncx . ll'ght bulb at wor
etectflC · ks-j ust as Edison did with the

The Nnrratlves: A Crit ical Analysis

Either ~f thes e stor.ies. would be fine if it refle

cted the reality of leadership
studies as it has evolved m the twentieth cent
ury. Both nan·atives tell essentially
the same story, but t?ey emphasize different
points of view, different perspec-
tives. T~e tro~ble with the narr ativ es-b oth the
basic story lines and the two
perspect1ves--1s that they do not tell the real story
in five important way s: . The narratives miss the mar k

l. The narr ative s are abou t leadership theo

ry as given to students and practitioners, the
consumers of the lead ersh ip literature, by
social psychologists and man agem ent sci-
entists. They leave out the stories of leadership
theory from other academic disciplines
and from the popular pres s.
2. The nam itive s indi cate that the different
theories of leadersMp were separate and
distinct movements in the history of leadership studi
es. The reality is that the move-
ments and the mod els they produced were
not distinct from one another. The theo ries
are a mish -mas h of the structural~functionalist
framework of groups and organizations.
The models feed on one another and are so inter
twined that they are indistinguishable
except to intellectuals who study leadership as a
profession.
3. The narratives suggest that each of the mov
ements had a be~~ni~g and an e~d. Such
is not the case . The theo ries have not died; they
h~ve ~een llVl~g in leadership book s,
chapters, and articles for years, and continue
to hve rn them m 1990 .
4· The
narrati' ves te 11 us abou t th.e tbeon·es of the dominant paradigm; they say nothing
ab ou t 1 , lea d h' th ·es that have been on the scen
a terna ttve ers 1p eol'l e for years. T he ston·es
tell us that thes e alter nativ e views don't count.
S Th · t the view that progress is being made in
· e na)?:'ntives are intended to commu~ica e th e stories like other mythological
our understanding of leadership. In th1 s sensale,l
tales . e:el l with' leadership studies as an
, pro duce a feeli•ng o f wen-bein g '. thatf ts
dership in the world. The message is
academic disc iplin e and with the prac tice 1
this: We real1y do know mor e abou t Ie~ders
or 1980. That message is very comfortmg to ~i~a
r
\· ~n 1990 than we did in 1960, or 1970,
~r especially if one believes, as man y
l and progress of our organizations,
do, that leadership is a cruc ial elem ent in tile
su
societies, and world.

137
 LEADERSHIP FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CE.,._,..,.,
24 •vil]~}'

Some comments on each of these five points will help to underscore th

rationale for this critique. They wiH als~ help readers to un~e~tand Why a ne~
school of leadership must be developed 1f scholars and_ practltioners really w
to understand what leadership is and how it operates m groups, organizatio=t
societies, and the world. '

Leadership as Social Psychologists

and Management Scientists View It
The narratives outline a view of leadership. articulated by social psycholoo-i t
th . . ()&Ss
and management theorists. All of the theories, except e ongmal great rnan
theory, were developed by social psychologists and m8:'agement scientists. The
great man theory was what academics were presented with when they first began
to think about leadership as a socfal construct in the early twentieth century. It
is interesting to note that after berating the great man theory of leadership for
decades, management scholars took it up again in the 1980s.
The group theory of leadership was developed by social psychologists, as
Browne and Cohn, s (1958) compendium makes abundantly clear. The trait theory
was developed by both management scientists and social psychologists, with the
latter having the dominant role in the trait research. Stogdill 's penetrating analysis
(1974, pp. 35-111) makes that point quite dramatically. Interestingly, Stogdill
was a professor of both management and psychology at Ohio State University.
The behavioral theory movement was primarily the work of management
theorists and social psychologists in the late 1950s who believed that they had
to accept behaviorism as the overarching scientific perspective in order to be
respected in the academic community.· They were not the only behavioral sci-
entists to hold that belief. For the same reason anthropologists, educators, po-
litical scientists, and sociologists adopted the behavioral perspective. Thus the
study of leadership was infused with a large dose of behaviorism that has been
retained to this day.
The contingency/situational theory movement was the work of management
scientists who took psycho]ogy to heart and of social psychologists who dabbled
in management science-a popular thing to do in the late 1960s and l 970s, with
Tavistock, Escalan, and the National Training Laboratories doing sensitivity
training and group dynamics, and with the popularity of human relations, or-
ganizational development, and pop psychology in organizations and management
thinking. The marriage of management and psychology was, and still is, very
evident in the work of the contingency/situational leadership scholars.
The excellence theory of leadership is almost completely the work of m~n-
agement scholars in business and educational administration. The proliferauo~
of leadership books in the 1980s was overwhelmingly the result of these scholars
becoming interested in leadership studies.
While these stories are accurate as far as they go, they do not go far enou~,
so the narrative in toto represents an inaccurate picture of where IeadershiP

138
r
~ov&RWEW
25
.
5
J1as bee n sin ce 1930. The l'ealit .
sti1d1 e ed in ant hro pol ogy , hist ory il. ~ 18
develoP as well as in the pop ula r pre~s~t
cioJ~g~elevision pro gra ms. To som e ex
It:y t?at leadership theory has bee n
science, political scie nce , and so-
t::t books, newspapers, and mag azin es)
9lld 10 dea l-th ere are lead ersh ip th thoug
.
~ great d visu al arts of the period :on es- emb h this has not bee n rese arc hed
usic, an . . · edd ed in the lite ratu re, dra ma ,
tt1 dership 1s by its very natu re asmc e 1930.
m lt' d' . .
r.,ea d. rship as a bid isci plin b~ 1 isc1plmary concept. The narratives
eat tea e
tr t scie nce cam e tog ethary ·su ~ect, and when . 1
Iflanagemen (l g&S) f, socia psycho1ogy and
e~, it
1og and Mor1ey . . ,·, ocu s on ow ~ca inac
me an unidisciplinary sub ject . Ho sk-
. ofleadersh1p is: We tak e the view curate the psychological/manage1ial
. v1eW
• • • , th t 1 •
•al ldnd of org aru zmg acti a eadersh1p processes rep rese nt a
5 pec1 • vity the org an· · • • .
making , con stru ed m the wid
•
est
' 1zm g acttvJty that 1s poh.llca
.
l dec1.s10n
.
.. , , pos sible sense . . I
. . n sum , leadersh'1p 1s · an
. herently pol itic al pro ces s (p, 91)
10 .
There is no ind icat ion in the narratives that
leadership is conceived as a pol itic al
process; _Managemen~ and psy c?~ log ical
scientists do not take kin dly to con -
ceptuallzmg leadership as a pol itic al pro
cess. Zaleznik (1989), a man age men t
theorist of lead ersh ip wit h a Fre udi an ben
t, argues that politics is par t of the
prob]em, not the solu tion , in tryi ng to concep
tualize and practice lead ersh ip.

In business orga niza tion s as in the

family, politics nourishes in the absence
and expression of talents. of con tent
Coo pera tion for· self-protection, althoug
tendency, is not true coo pera tion . One of h an understandable
the critical jobs of leadership is to ove
these political incl inat ions and to encourag rcom e
e the expression of talent and the perf onn
of useful work. Tru e coo pera tion then follo anc e
ws because people are working for a dyn ami
organization that has dire ctio n. Leadership c
also amplifies the motivation to wor k bec
people experience the fusion of rationality aus e
with talent. (p. 35)

Zaleznik opi ned tha t the pol itic al mod

el of leadership as explicated by Neu stad
0980) "m ay refl ect the real itie s of election t
politics and bureaucratic con tinu ity,
but is bizarre if app lied to bus ine ss" (p.
32) . Out with Bur ns, Kel lerm an, Lin d-
blom, Neustadt, Pai ge, and Tuc ker , who do
not fit into the rational,, technological,
and psychological und erst and ing of lead ersh
ip propagated by the man age men t
theorists.
Many anth rop olo gist s, hist oria ns, political scie
ular press c ntists, and authors_ in the p~p -
.
onc ept ua11ze d hi as a poli tica l pro cess. The consistency wit h
Which man 1 ers p
ea
1_ead
d h
age men t an psy c o1og1c • al sc·ientists have developed a worldv1. ew of
ership.dev oid of pol itic s sho ws how narrow . . . . .
1s
anct h , thei r umd 1~c1phnary perspective
ow ina . , Of I d rship theory 1s.
Sociolo • ccu rate the ir narratiV .
e
h ve
ea e .
been very mterested .•m the nature-
nutt • gists and anth rop olo gist s a
Ure 1ss • 1 d h' Th notion that lead ers are
bol'!l ues con cer nin g ea ers and leaders . 1p by • e
management scientists and
to anct not ma de has bee n dismissed sum 1
60 man Y
'l'hrne. extent by soc ial psy cho log is · ts ·
. e idea that lea der shi p is a natu ral h menon- as esse ntia l to hum an
P eno

139
 26
existence and progress as O
LBADERSiilP FOR THE 1WENTY-FIRST CeN1'CJf?l'

waterical
d tr
a
. are to human life-is taken for grant
an scholars , but muc rn
h ore hotl Y d ebated becJ
l
by management and psych~l g M' manage ment scholar , propose d a •'h Y
8 h t fJ er,
sociologists and an tliropo
Jog1sts
d. mer,
h'p sympos ium: that t e concep .o eadershj
ip in fav p
esy" (his word) in 1975 at a lea e1sl t gest that we abando n , leadersh . or
. ful s Hence sug 1
' f utting up the theoretica pie'' (p. 200)
has outlived its use nes. ·
of som~ other, more fruitful 7::d:rs~p should be ?bando ned was unthinkabJ;
The notion that the concep! of h 1 at the sympos mm and to those who coi
to the mainstream leaderslup s;,c; ~;:;ar d. Not only would such a sugges u:
mented on _the heres_r for yeah ve idea was unthink able because leadershi
destroy therr professIOn, but t e d ryh d appeared in human thought as long agop
h •m existenc. e an a . d Rome. They were not willin
was natural t o um, . g to
as biblical antiquity and ancient Greece an
. . t in the sociolog ical literatu re, that leadersh ip is
debate the idea, quite preva1en . .
a nurtured concept of quite recent ongm • . .
The idea that certain people are born to be lea~ers r~mams qmte prevale nt in
some of the anthropological, historical, and sociological frame~ orks of lead-
I ership, as well as in many views of leadership that have appear~ d m the popular
18
press and in the arts since 1930. The great man/wom_an the~ry ~ar from de~d,
,/
but management and psychol ogical scholars have actively discred ited the notion
since the 1930s. Unwittingly, however, many management scholar s resurrected
the basic notion of the great man/wo man theory in the l 98Os in articulating the
I excelJe nce theory of leadersh ip and more recently in a charism atic theory of
leadersh ip. Central to both theories is the require ment that great women and
men be Jeaders.
The narrow perspective of management and psychologic;a1 scientis ts regarding
leadership will be documented in Chapters 3 and 4. At this point, my objective
has been to indicate that there was no room for other, quite legitimate frameworks
of leaders hip in the narrativ es of mainstream leaders hip theory. As a result, the
stories do not accurately reflect the real history of leadership studies as an
academ ic discipli ne.

Distinct TI1eories of Leadership

The second inaccur acy in the narratives of leaders hip theory as told by main~
stream theorists is that the stories present the theories as distinct and separate
from one another . First came the great man theory, against which group theory
reacted . Then came the trait, behavio rist, contingency/situational, and excellence
theories , all of which reacted against and improv ed on the theories preceding
them. The earlier theories were inadequate to explain leadership, so the psy-
chologists and management scientists had to distance themselves from them in
order to develop a theory that was new, distinct, and more sophist icated, and
that did, finaJJy, explain leadership.
!h~ sepa:ate and d!stinct view is .mi_sleading. Theinggroup theories included
group facilitation. The
traits m their explana tions and prescnp tions concern

140
AN OVERVIEW
27
trait theories looked lik
theories were very e great men cancatur .
theories merely add!;'~Up-. and trait-orienes in egalit arian dress. The behavioral
th
ories, thus continuin a ircl dimension 0 /~h nd
a the contingency/situational
beh~vior the-
nations of previous ti!r• be a hodgepodge 0 f e two-di~ensional
behavmr expla-
the previous theorie . •es. The excellence grou?, tra,t, and less integrate all
cholars are mo . s mda more elitist contelheon es more or
xt and, 1'f anything, • .
s re tnclin
. e to espou se the , leadership
than they have b
ll f th een smce the Great D gre~t man/woman theory in the 1980s
A 0 ese theories have ' epress1on.
explain , all leaders•h'1p theor1·es h on elements. As critica
comm · • l theon.sts are wont to
·
· the hterarc
in
hical, linear pra ave .a structural-functionalist frame of reference
what makes the world go , gmatic, Newtonian background assumptions of
. di ed aroun .
d (Smyth ' 19 89b). As many commentators have
m cat , the leadership th eones are all ted. They simply
take f or granted that leadershi an very management orien
scholars on the left and ert P d management are the same. As Marxist
th t the leadership
theories have been domi~et:~ er eoriS s on the right have said,
i:
the consequence of which that t~ an almost total conc~ntratio
In these theories leader h.
~ on the leader,
d ere has been almost no interest m the followers.
Other critique~ of the: T a; le~der have been used as synonymous terms.
, e ea ership tbeories have pointed to the majo r points
of view that they h Th th . .
ave m common· . ·. e . eones have been goal-ach1evement-
oriented often in th cost-benefit
tenns p~ssible· the e mo5t pragm~tic, self-interested, individualistic, group rela-
small
f h. t th' d Y overemp~aSize face-to-face, dyadic, and and political rela-
~ons ~ps O e etriment of transforming, larger, symbolic,
th and largely
tion~htps that may be organizational and societal in their bread ·
earned on through a medium t·hat 1·s not f ace-to-f ace; they are representative of
ric, Old West, and
male, even ?1acho, characteristics that contain heroic, folklo
short-term
Hollywood images of what males do as leaders; they are utilitarian
;ively ration~
and materialistic in their ethical base; and, finally, they are exces
assumptions,
alistic, technocratic, quantitative, and scientific in their background
methods used
as well as in the language used to fonnulate the concepts and the
s in the literature.
to research leadership and then discuss the research conclusion
trial paradigm
In sum, all of the ]eadership theories have reflected the indus
industrial era are
very well. The descriptors that scholars have given to the
these lead-
exactly those I have given above. Analyzed individually or in toto,
nt-oriented,
ership theories have been (I) structural-functionalist, (2) manageme
nt-dominated,
(3) personalistic in focusing only on the leader, (4) goal-achieveme
(7) utilitarian
(5) self-interested and individualistic in outlook, (6) male-oriented,
ocratic, linear,
and materialistic in ethical perspective, and (8) rationalistic, techn
one ~haracw
quantitative, and scientific in langu_age and met~odolo~y. In o~ly
t · ti d they contradict the descnptors of the indus
trial paradigm: their pen-
ehns t cfi
O
n entrating on face-to-face and small group relationships. While that
f . . t d . f h .
C an or co C asive in the management rame,• 1t 1s no a escnptor o t •e
• t' · pe..,.•
charact.ens which is much more onented to unpersonal and bureaucratic
1c 1s 1 v •
. I d'
mdustna para 1gm,
relationships.

141
 28 LEADERSHIP FOR THE TWEN TY-F IRST CENT
o~r
Th . . . h th arious leadership theories of the perio d since
e pomt 1s t at e v 1930 .
ks Ther e are very st ate
not discr ete and distinct conc ep~a l fra~ew~~a
grou nd assum ption s based on the m d ustrtal P di g_m that are part an~ong back:.

II all of the leadership theories and make these theories Paree} of

more or 1ess the same.

Sepa rate Time Fram es for the Lead ershi p Theo ries
The narratives tell us that each leadership t~eory domi
nated a. cert'? n Period
in the histo ry of leadership studies, and then ~tsappeare
d after bemg discredited
by the scho lars who developed the new theon es.
The facts are that while several move ment s were quite
popu lar durin g certain
perio ds of time their dominance was far from total. Cont
rary to popular belief
none of the the~ries have become completely extin ct. They
reapp ear decade afte~
deca de, sometimes disguised, sometimes in anoth er
form , but basically intact
and flourishing.
For exam ple, many commentators see the 1980 s as domi
nated by the excel-
lence theor y of leadership. But that theory is highly influ
enced by the great man1
wom an theory, as all the leadership books on CEOs demo
nstra te. Burn s's trans-
formational theory oflea dersh jp, very popular during the
deca de, is very political
and ethical in its orientation. Bennis and Nanu s (198
5), Kouz es and Posner
(198 7), Kott er (198 8), and Maccoby (1981, 1988) were
very concerned with
lead er traits and behavior. J. G. Hunt (198 4a, b, & c)
was push ing a second
gene ratio n of contingency theories. Fiedler and Garc ia
(198 7) publ ished a book
revis ing and updating Fied ler's contingency theory of
the 1960 s. Smith and
Pete rson (198 8) docu ment ed scores of recen t publicatio
ns on grou p, behavioral,
and situa tiona l theor ies, and then spen t the seco nd half
of their book trying to
shor e up those theories. Foste r (1986a & b) and Smy
th (198 9b) a1ticulated a
critic al theor y of leadership that has clear Marx ist roots
. Tuck er (1981) and
Kell erma n (198 4a) developed political models of leade
rship . Bass ( 1985) and
Cong er (198 9a) unea rthed a charismatic theor y oflea dersh
ip. S. M. Hun t (1984)
and McE lroy and Hung er (1988) spread the news abou
t an attrib ution theory of
leade rship . Blan char d continued to publish a spate of one-
minu te manager/leader
mini volu mes that furth er refined the situational theor
in the early 1970s,
y of leade rship developed
Now , if the exce llenc e theory of leade rship was so
dom inan t in the 1980s,
why were those autho rs publ ishin g work s on other theor
ies durin g that decade?
The facts are that any one theor y did not undu ly dom
inate any deca de to the
exclu sion of othe r theor ies. The theories did not 1un
riot in any one separate
time perio d, nor did they disap pear from the picture
when the next so-call~d
dom inan t theo ry appe ared on the scen e. Once the
theor ies gain ed a certa ~
curre ncy, they rema ined in the litera ture, and they
cont inue to rema in there in
1990 . The theories also remained in the behavioral habit
s of practitioners who
cont inue d to put the theor ies into pract ice long after
they were discredited by
researchers.

142
j>J-IOVERVIEW

A rnuch more accurat . 29

...,0 vements is that there ewinterp
retation 0 f
1 · s of h the
b ut wh en that Populaere. penod . se theories as a saga of popular
O
"
nes, rity w eight
ened Popularity &.1or certam th
f h 1 . er anec. t • the theor·
pract·ltion
•
e-
ltearts. o Iscf o ars and
. ies remained in the . d and
tunctionaf rame within wh·1c inost h s alike bee ause the mm s
J.'
O mo st practitioners rese arch er. Yappealed to the structural-
psyche 1 operated and to the managerial
and spoke to theoretical and. n s~in, they c~e out of the industrial paradigm
practical purveyors of th .
• e industrial complex.
A,.Iternabve Leadership Theor1es .

,The theories that make up th .

sentative of the dominant concept e narrattves of leadersb.1P theory are all repre-
h OI uaI fr
.
soctal psyc ogy · As a resu Jt, the theo;mework in management science and
that represent an alternative paradig es that speak in a different voice and
are not part. of the story '
I have already indicated that anthm, ropolo . I . .
. h . . g1ca , h1st oncal, political , and soci-
olog1cal t eor.1es had not been allowed Into th .
e mner sanctum, not so much
b~cause they reflected a paradigm d'f{i 1
dominates leadership studies , but beeauseeren t from the industrial paradigm that
they had d"fi;
men t, a diff eren t wor 1dv ' th . ' a 1 1erent context, a different
environ iew han d1d the theon·es of management and
ological wri ters . Man y of th · 1·mes were
Psych as co .e. sc olar.s from these other d'isc1p
as behavior-oriented . and
mmitted to the structural-fun ctional frame as were
. · ts A h h
the µian agehmen t sc1ent1sts. .and the social psychologis . s a resu1t, t e ant ro-
• · • as caught up in
poJog~sts,.
1st onans_, P~htical _scientists, and sociologists were
of theory and models as the other
the scientific, quantitative, rationalistic view
rences. The anthropologists
scholars. But there were still fundamental diffe
ght in terms of long time frames,
thought in terms of culture, the historians thou
the political scientists thought in tenns of
politics, and the sociologists thought
ldviews were foreign to the
in terms of institutions and societies. These wor
They did not think in terms of
management and psychological researchers.
eties. Their worldviews extended
culture, Jong time frames, politics, and soci
from the individual to dyadic relationships
to sma)l groups, to departments, and
typicaUy sbor~-range: .
to organizations; and their time frames were
the leadership studies _narratives
The exclusion of alternative theories from
back to th~ l 930~, b~t 1t became
has not been a recent problem. It extends ng which ttme the field
. fr the 19508 to the mid-1980s, tdun and psychological scholars
particularly severe om
e:: ~ the mid-1980s, primarily
became a fairly ex~lusi_ve club t~at a fe: ;:n ~~
controlled. The situation has attra improvd B ms's theory • and he certainly was .
1 cte toh ubad alternative views of leadership
because so many peop e were . ' 0
not a mem ber of the club . The sch ola rs; st dedicated empiricists (see Im-
could no longer be ignored except by ~ e::~ 19
sos scholars who articulated
megart, 1988). And, much to th~ c~~~t ~eg
a: using concepts such as culture,
king toward a longer time frame ..
the excellence theory of leadership,ted ly 00 · d by the mam-
d th eY star e of a scho lar who was igno re
politics, and society, an
Selznick (1957), a goo d exa mpl

143
r,1
1
30 LEADERSHIP FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURy

i
I
I
I
wr ote a lan dm ark stu dy of. the
TV A. ld'
.
str eam ma nag em ent an d psy c h Olog ica l sc1ent·st
.

an
s wa s a po liti cal soc iol og ist
In 195 he 'pro du ce~ ~ sm all b o_o . Who
7
I

off ice /po s1t ton

k m which
he dis tin gu ish ed leadershi~ fro an d hk en ed it to
m ho ~g ·nf usi ng val ues an
ins titu tio nal iza tio n, by wh ich d pu rpo se into an
I . . he me an . 1 soc iol og ica l po
org aru zat mn (all o f w h'ich is . a ver y typ1ca1 int of vie w) . "1' he ·
. . ti. "' . ari ly an ex pe rt in the pro mo tio n and
ms tltu on al 1eader, " he wr ote is pri m
\ · f l ' h
pro tec tio n o va ues ,, (p · 28): Alt ou g po p
h ula r wi th pra ch. tm
.
ne rs, the bo ok and
its un der sta nd ing of lea der shi tr ted the gro up an d beh avi.ora
p nev er penh~ a tud'1es nar rat ive l views
• h
of lea der shi p t at om ma d · ted the lea der s 1p s s.
In the 1960s and 19 70 s, the be
re we re a nu m r .of lea de rsh ip sch ola rs who
. .
def ine d lea der shi p m terms O f · fluence bu t tha t vie w ne ve r en ter ed .
. m ' . , the ma in-
str eam 11terature eca use the con cep t wa s too pobt1cal and l'
b I ·
·r d
d1 ficu1t to o an em pm • •ca1 study of influence. Le ad • s 1ppery. t 1s
· fl • very
ers hip as m ue nc e 1s not
pa rt of the nar rat ive s.
S oc1· 01og1· st s h ave d eve1ope d ,an artrt'bution the ory . .
ute , lea der shi p is the nam e tha of lea de rsh ip. As an attrib -
t peo ple use to ma ke sen se ou
an d the ou tco me s of eve nts the t of co m~ lex events
y oth erw ise wo uld no t be ab le
wo rds , peo ple att rib ute leader to ex pla m. In oth er
ship to cer tai n individu_als wh
be cau se peo ple wa nt to bel iev o are cal led leaders
e tha t lea der s cau se things_ to
ha ve to exp lai n cau sal ity by ha pp en rat he r t~an
un der sta nd ing com ple x so~tal
the dy nam ic int era cti on am on for ces or ana lyz mg
g peo ple , eve nts , an d en vir on
S. Hu nt, 1984; Mc Elr oy & Hu me nt (C ald er, 1977;
ng er, 1988; Pfe ffe r, 19 77 ). Su
int o qu est ion the ide a of leader ch a no tio n calls
ship as som eth ing tha t is really
the nar rat ive s of lea der shi p stu rea l; an d as suc h,
dies cou ld no t acc om mo da te
Fin all y, the sag a of leadership att rib uti on the ory .
studies do es no t me nti on Bu rns
the ory of lea der shi p is politic (19 78 ), wh ose
ally ba sed an d to a lar ge ex ten
the ma ins tre am the ori es. Hi s t ign ore s mo st of

II in Ho lla nd er (1964; 1978a),

Jac ob s (19 70 ), wh o wa s no t;
lea der shi p. Ev en tho ug h the exc
tra nsa cti on al lea der shi p mo de
wh o wa s pa rt of the ma ins tre
bo th of the m esp ou sed an ex
han ge the ory wa s pro mo ted by
l ha s its ant ece den ts
am gro up , and in
ch an ge the ory of
and psy cho log ica l sch ola rs, it som e ma nag em ent
wa s ne ve r acc ept ed by the ma
tol d the nar rat ive s bec aus e the jor sch ola rs wh o
theory wa s ba sed on po we r rel
bar gai nin g, tra din g, an d com pro ati on s an d req uir ed
mi sin g am on g lea der s an d fol
tra nsa cti on al the ory ma kes fol low ers . Ex cha ng e/
low ers cen tra l to lea der shi p be
nif ica ntl y inv olv ed in the neg oti cau se the y are sig"
ati on s tha t acc ou nt for the exc
In add itio n, the y evi den tly ha han ge/ tra nsa cti on .

I
ve mi nd s of the ir ow n. Ma ins
un wi llin g to thi nk of lea der tre am the ori sts were
shi p as any thi ng be yo nd lea
lea der shi p. Le ade rs an d ma nag de rs/ ma na ge rs doing
ers are the on ly pe op le wh o co
In sum , Bu rns 's tra nsa cti on al un t in the se theories.
mo del of lea der shi p, lik e its pre
the ory '. wa s to_o po liti cal , and de ces sor , exc han ge
the ref ore un acc ept abl e to ma
cho log ica l pu ris ts wh o tol d the na ge me nt and psy-
lea der shi p stu die s nar rat ive s.
\ Bu ms be c~ e fam ou s am on g
alt ern ati ve lea der shi p sch ola rs
of tra nsf orm atm nal le~dership be cau se his model
inc lud ed an eth ica l/m ora l dim
19 78 , had no t bee n mf use d en sio n tha t, pri or to
int o an y lea der shi p the ory .
Se lzn ick (19 57 ) bad
 Af'lo-VERVIEW 31

uated leaders hip with the infusion Of .

eq ecessarily ethical or moral Th values mto organizations, but values are
J10t ntural-functionalists who . h ere was certainly no room in the saga of the
, esc ewed ki d . b'
5trUC
inade scholar ship unscien tific ~ any n_ of value orientation as a . ms
that al compon ent. Even after s~ ~r a leadership theory that inserted a require d
~or vered Burns, they sanitized ;e tnanagement and psychologi~al scholar s
d~sco f signific ant chan e t . is concept of transformation to include any
fdnd
O
( A · . &g n'no JUS t changes that had a morally upliftin g effect ·
, Bass, 1985; Conger & Kanungo, 1988;
ass ' 1988·
110
on Peop e see vo 1982
1 ·
peters & Waterm an, ; Bennis & Nanus, 1985). Moral transfor mation then
t,ecame perform ance beyo expectations, excellence, and charism a. Please un-
nd
derstand what happen~d here--t hese authors didn't say, "We disagree with Bums
t,ecause we don t ?elteve that leadership must have a moral dimens ion . ' ' They
changed_ the meamn g ?f the con~ept of transformation, yet claimed they were
being faithful to Bums s theory of leadership. Now that it had been so sanitize d;
management and psycho logical scholars could incorporate "transf ormatio nal
leadership'' into the excellence theories of leadership and incJude the sanitize d
version in the narrativ es of leadership studies.
The narrativ es tell the story of leadership studies from a very narrow per-
spective and thus give a very inaccurate description of what scholar s have though t
about leaders hip since the 1930s. Since the 1960s particularly, there have been
significant views of Jeadership that the mainstream scholars have ignored , much
to the detrime nt of leaders hip studies as an academic discipline and to the
practitioners who put leaders hip theory to work. To some extent, what is con-
sidered mainstr eam was expand ed considerably in the 1980s; but old, worn, and
narrow concep ts of leaders hip die hard, as J. G. Hunt's (1984c) label of Burns' s
theory as radical (pp. 131-133) and Immega rt's (1988) evaluation of Burns' s
theory as nonemp irical (p. 260) ·attest.

Theoretical Quiescence
Myths and rituals, Edelma n (1964, 1971) suggested in proposi ng a symbol ic
view of politics , serve either to induce quiescence ~r to cause ~rousal. The same
myths and rituals .are used by people on different sides o~ an 1ssu~ or by p_eople
on the same side of an issue at different times in a pohcy-m akmg process to
make other person s (1) feel good about events, movements, a?d/o~ pr9pos als,
and thus feel satisfie d about them, or (2) feel unhappy and d1ssabsfi~d ~bout
them ' and thus b ecome aroused to ·take action or someho w express their
.
d1ssat-
.
.
isfaction . Satisfie d people are general1 y quiet, acceptin g, calm, and mactiv e-
in a d . . f fled people who are aroused k'ng general ly express that
wor , qmescent. 0 1ssa 1s . . up and m k'
dissatis faction by grumbl ing, quarrel ing, agitatm g, spea J , a mg
counte al • by taking action.
rp:°~os ~m sum, lman's model of symbolic politics is that the
s What is mtere~ tmg about Ede d as tactics in the play for power by opposi ng
::0-e myths and rituals can be used fi 11 0 wers can use them to quiet people by
04
oups. One group of leaders an °
145
 LEADERSHIP FOR THE '/WENTY-FIRST CEN1'tJ1ry
32
ers and followers can use thern 1
group of Jead k b . o
inducing satisfaction; anotlier . . Or the framewor can e put Into tw o
. . d'15satisfaction. fI
arouse people by 1~ducmg. In other words, the ~a~e group ? eadcrs and
or more different time penods. . 1 tone point ID. time to quiet people and
s and ntua s a . ti' t .
followers can use the my th h at a third pomt m me, o qmet thern
at a later time to arouse diem, a t
n
nd e;; the point that the myths and rituals are
again. Either way, Edeli:zian u cle~i~: that the system (group, department, or.
used to provide symbohc r~assur k' 0 r alternatively, is not working. Inter.
ganization, society, world) 18 wor mg t 1•0' light of the. myths and rituals of the
. . h · g in the presen . .
preting what 1s apperun . . hether the system 1s or 1s not workmg, anct
culture is the key to determmmg w
· rousal is needed. ·
whether qu~escence or a . . . Edelman's symbolic theory of politics is that
Another integral propoSition m. rtant to people in the political process as
symbolic rewards are at least ast' unpo
d
s· . . .
nes are more important. mce 1t 1s impossib le
.
are tang1b]e rewards, an somel of u the time with . tang1'bl e rewards, Jeaders and
to please all of theb peop Ie al · · fi d, th us providmg ·•
c . W""ds to help. keep people satis 1e
1ollowers use sym o11c re w. Edelman
• •
md1cated that there
. th t the system is working.
.
syrnboI1c reassurance a
·1s cons1·aerable ev1'dence to show that symbohc rewards actualJy work. They are
· ed and sought after·, they help people feel good. about
. themselves, their
appreciat
class, and the system; they allow people to accept d~1S1ons or ev~nts ~~t are
not personally appreciated; they develop confidence .m the ~ead~r s ?bil1ty to
solve problems. In summary, they provide reassurance and mamtam qmescence.
They encourage people to say "We are making progress," even when there is
considerable factual evidence to the contrary.
Edelman's model of symbolic politics fits perfectly with the myths and rituals
that leadership scholars have promoted in the narratives about leadership studies.
The mythologi~al narratives-the saga as told in either version-are designed
to provide symbolic reassurance to the readers of the leadership literature that
(I) the system of research has been working; (2) the leadership scholars have
been doing what they are supposed to do-increase our understanding of lead-
ership; (3) there has been progress toward that objective, and as a result both
scholars and practitioners can rest assured that they have an increasingly so-
phisticated understanding of leadership; and (4) this better understanding of
leadership will help make organizations more productive and, in the end, the
United States and the world a better place to live and work. (Ahnost all of the
researchers who were part of the narrative are from the United States.)
The myths are told over and over again in management textbooks used in
business, education, health, and public administration programs throughout the
United States. They are told over and over again in two major handbooks of
leadership (Stogdill, 1974; Bass, 1981), in eight volumes from the leadership
symposia (1973-1988), in three editions of the Handbook of Social Psychology
(Gibb, 1954; Gibb, 1969; Hollander, 1985); in Cartwright's (1965) chapter in
I I
~e Hand~oo~ ofOrganiz~tio,~, in House and Baetz' s (1979) chapter in Research
m Orgamzatzonal Behavior; m Immegart's (1968) chapter in the Handbook of

I-i6
r ovEflVJEW
;JI
33
ch 0 ,i Educational Administrat. .
oesear
J' k of [ndustria. l an d Organizationazon;
l p 111 Vr00m's (1976) chapter in thelland-
b0;01es and Davenport (1975), Smith ;chology, and
in leadership books such
is d of course, the myths are told ov nd· Pete~on
(1988), and Yukl (1989).
A11 1~ajor leadership scholars of the pe; ;:~ over again in the
books written by
tJtC Mouton (1964), Fiedler (1967) H since
about 1960: Bass , Blake (l 960)
an~uons), Hollander (1964), Likert (i ~~e i ao d Blanchard (198
~ 57), and Vroom and Yetton (19?96). , cGregor (1960), Stog8 and previous
3 dill and Coon_s
( '{'he major mythological message in the
· hers and scholars are making pr s_e and other works is that the re-
scare there usually are one-sentenc ogress m understan
ding leadership. To be
sore,t·on the pace or the strength ef ohr one-paragraph
q11es I at lead caveats that sometimes
o . t e progres b t th
doUbt th ersh ip .research ers • s, u ese au thors leave no
. 'fi ant contributions to the ov m gene ral (and th ·
s1gtll ic era 11 ey m part1·cuIar) have made
unde rstan d'
work of leadership studies as a d'1sc1p . 1·me, mg of Ieadersh'ip, wh'ich is· h
t e
F r example, even after hundreds f
. o ociates for confusin lend .o commentators have fau~ted Fiedler and
htS ass h h . g ers wi th
f<Hlmework t at as 11ttle or no validit mana d
gers and for producmg a conceptual
.
Jl" • • • Y an make s little sense m. .
1ea de rship Fied ler and Garc ia (198 7) remam understanding
t • · firm that
leaders and managers are
the Same and that then· contingency model 1s · an accurate ·:
construct of leadership
There have been various proposals (e.g., Gibb, 1969) to
reserve the tenn leader for those
who lead by virtue of their personal charisma and the estee
m in which their subordinates
bold the_~· The tei:m head supp~s~ly ~esignate..c; the admi
nistrator or manager who holds
the pos1t1on by virtue of adm1rustrat1ve appointment.
Our research thus far does not
demonstrate the need for this distinction. (p. 3)

The effect of all this reassurance is, of course, to indu

ce satisfaction and thus
quiescence among other leadership scholars and the pract
itioners of leadership.
The message has been, and still is: "All is going
well and we are making
progress.'' And the mythological narratives have had
their intended effect, at
least until the late l 980s, when the number of scho
lars calling for a better
understanding of leadership had, perhaps, reached a more
critical mass,
The rituals surrounding leadership studies µave had the same
effect. The myths
and rituals reinforce one another to provide the powe
rful symbolic reassurance
that the system is productive and progressive.
The first ritual that became very popular, starting with
the LBDQ in the 1950s,
was giving tests , Several dozen of these self-report ques
tionnaires were devel-
oped, including Fiedler' s LPC questionnaire, tests
to determine if the leader is
Theory X or Theory y or (later) Theory z, Blake and
Mouton's tests to place
~e leader on the managerial grid, Hersey and B_lan
char~'s battery of tests for
situational leaders, Kouzes and Posner's equally unpress1ve
package, and those
used by the Center for Creative Leadership, the NASSP
(and other) assessment
centers, and consultants for organizations. Testing as a
ritual plays to our pen-

147
 LEADERSHIP FOR THE TWEN TY-FI RST CENT01t't
34
· I syrnbo]s of .how we. .are do'1ng as
chant for quantification and for nurnerica rmg empm cal ev·d
f ·ence as gathe
leade rs. It also accepts the concepth ob set . 1 ence

. s only on t e as·s
. g conclusion 1 of such eVIdence.
If the test sh ows
and makin
it, whate ver it is must be true. Since the tests are better and bette r as the Years
b l · g progr ess ·
go by, the scholars are saying, we must e ma cm
An earlie r ritual which evidently is no longe r accep lable, was to frame one's
d result s identified as
under stand ing of ieadership in the contexl of peopl e ao
letter s of the alphabet. "If A did such-and.-such to B,_ an?
C ~e5 ulted from this
i?n of peopl e and
intera ction, D (leadership) occur red.'' Agrun, such ~bJ~cttficat
partic ularly , to look
proce sses was an attempt on the part of the behav ionsts ,
scientific.
rship ha-, been a
Deve lopin g diagr ams of two-dimensional mode ls of leade
es and givin g each
majo r ritual in leadership studies. Draw ing two-b y-two squar
of the four squar es a cleve r name was almos t a neces sity if
a resea rcher wanted
ls becam e three-di-
to sell his o~ her work. When the two-dimensional mode
taken seriously, as
mens ional , the visual overlays of the third dimen sion were
mater ial into un-
the artwo rk show s. Models are a way of collap sing comp lex
. dersta ndabl e pictur es that present the research as a whole .
What was ritualistic
nes_s of the models
was not so much the practice of drawing models as the same
ted over and over to
as they were diagrammed. Rituals are actions that are repea
one believ ed that
ensur e belief . The two-by-two models certainly did that. Every
. When the two-
a two-f actor mode l was the basic way to under stand leade rship
nsion show ed prog-
dimen siona l mode ls became three-dimensional, the third dime
ress.
es, rectangles,
Anot her ritual was drawing systems-oriented figures with squar
were intend ed to
triang les, and circles connected by arrows. These diagr ams
the next and finally
show how leade rship as a process goes from one point to
mode l was widely
ends up with, usual ly, goal achievement. Since the syste ms
in leade rship studies
respe cted in the academic community, adopt ing the ritual
frame of reference.
helpe d to show that researchers were curre nt in their scientific
ritual izing how
Less popul ar, but still highly valued, were decis ion trees
on that kind of ritual
leade rs shoul d behav e in certain circumstances. Varia tions
to do in any given
were whee ls that could be manipulated to show leade rs what
s with descriptors
situat ion. Other rituals were two- or three- or four- colum n chart
of leade rship behav-
in each colum n, contin uum Jines show ing vario us degre es
ice ''lead ershi p."
iors, and short simulatio~ exercises that allow ed peopl e to pract
ttes, workbooks,
Anot her ritual is producing movie s, audio - and video casse
e in one of the lead-
ove~head/slides, and com~uterized softw are to train peopl
devel op confidence
ershi p models. These audio and visual aids are inten ded to
in the leade rs~p models as accurate and reliab le. They also
win disciples who·
other peopl e to the
suppo rt a partic ular model, and these discip les then conve rt
appro ach. d
Nanu s, Blake ao
Doin g collaborative research is anoth er ritual: Benn is and
and Chem ers, Fied~
Mout on, Brow ne and Cohn , Cartw right an(;I Zand er, Fiedl er

1-J.8
r ,o ypRVJEW

d Garcia, Hersey and Blanchard H

"
lt'1r 811 J. G. Hunt and Osborn, Katz ~d 0;se and Mitchell, J. G. Hunt
11 and
r.,iiJ'S~o~nbardo, Peters and Watennan, p B ;h~, Kouzes and Posner, McCa
ll
iod bJilidt, Tichy and Devanna and y · truth and Peterson, Tannenbaum
afld S~es involved in leadership s{udies ;~o~ an<l Yetton are but a few of the
t\1/os~ ursomes writing chapters and articl e ~BOs saw a number of threesomes
1111d :cbolars may be viewed as a way
fllore h
t~~il
0
~llaborative research by two or
dmg confidence in the output of
researc •
we , allY, a very important ritual was to t
f:rshiP meanin~ful, especially to pract itio::: on styles as a way to make
Jend ted in anything more ~ubstantial Th. . ' who were assumed not to
be
inte~es studies has been virtually identifi~ w~s ntual was so important that lead-
ersbJPo work with, both from a research ~th lei!dership styles. Styles are fairly
easYtifi~ d and obiectified and ·ft· er~ ~omt of view, since they can be
quan e d to work J '
on one's om
I d h'a practitioner's · t f ·
.. pom o view, smce· h
can be use th h 1 ey
ea ers P ability. Again, these rituals givet the
.i1J1pression that bo · t e researchers and the practit' ak'
• • d , . toners are m mg progress
in understanding _an engagm~ in leadership.
On the other side of the com, researchers like m If d th
.
nud 9 · yse · an o ers, especi·a11y
since the -l SOs, have used the myths and rituals contained in the narratives
to arous~ 0ther researche~s and practitioners so that they become dissatisfied
with mamst~eam le~~ershlp .r~se~ch. If enough scholars express their dissati
s-
faction an~ if practitioners Jo~n ~' a climate for change may develop and we
may expenence a traosfor~atmn m our understanding of leadership. A
shift in
paradigm could result, which could give us a whole new understanding of lead-
ership.
In this context, the myths and rituals are used to show that the ma~stream
leadership theories did not live up to the hopes and dreams, the basic objectives,
that the mythological narratives have promised for leadership studie
s. Bums
(1978) began the process, attacking the myths and rituals indirectly, and
even
more substantively by developing a completely new understanding of
leader ship
that did not embrace any of the mainstream theories which make up the narrat
ive.
Greenleaf (1977) did the same thing in developing his servant leadership mode]
.
Pondy's (1978) "Leadership Is a Language Game" challenges the leader
ship
narrative more directly. Dubin (1979) confronted the mainstream literature head-
on in "Metaphors of Leadership: An Overview." So did Mintzberg (1982)
in
his "If You're Not Serving Bill and Barbara, Then You're Not Serving Lead-
ership." Peters and Waterman's attack in "The Rational Model" (1982, pp. 29-
54) was more generalized but no less effective. Feminists have been more
ef-
fective in critiquing management theories than leadership theories, but lately
several have distinguished leadership from management and as a consequence
have hit the mainstream theorists in more vulnerabJe areas (see Buckley & Steffy
,
l986; Calas & Smircich 1988· Kellerman, 1984a; Sayre, 1986; Stewart,
1984).
~asking and Morley (1988) h~ve a stinging critique of mainstream theories
in
The Skills of Leadership. " The chapters in Smyth's (1989b) book are filled

P9
 CEA,-,,. _
IP FOR THE TWENTY'-FIRSJ' "J Uf?y
LEADERSH
36 na1js
an d ri tu al s o f stru ctu:'1l-functio
iti ca l th eo rist s slaying the myths s (1 98 9) al so re3cct the domina:
with cr z and ~im
s to le ad er ship studies. Man .
I ac; it
ra
r~
di
la
gm
te
, as do es Sergi ov anni (1 990) , I thmk .
its m es sa ~ e 15 loud and_ clear.
Th
e
pa
ok se rv es the same objective; os es sm ce the 1930s m refiecti
This bo their purp ·ng
sh ip na rr at iv es may have served er ac ce pt ab le as our understand
leader no long s:g
du st ri al pa ra di gm, but they are st ce nt ur y to re flect a postindu
the in twenty-f ir · aJ
le ad er sh ip is tr ansformed in the lo p a ne w le ad ership narrative w1th
o f ed to de ve ' m. A 11d practition
rship scholars ne
paradigm. Leade
. .sed myths and rituals th
revi
at flt the po
ia
st
l
m.
le
dustri'al parad1g
ad er sh ip models that help
them ma~:
f th
adopt postin~us tr modern world o
ad er sh ip ne ed to e rs in th e po st
of le and follow ership models in
th _e
I e o f w ha t th ey do as leaders an sf on ne d le ad
se ns
nt ur y. O nly with these tr
e pr ac tic al ways o f d .eir

I t":'enty-tir st ce the skil ls -t h omg

w ill th ey be able to develop e th e fu tu re w ork.
mmds
are necessary to
help mak
leadership-that

I
I
I

I 15()
~
fbe Concept of Or .
WbY :Bother? g;lnizationaI Culture:
gdgar H. Schein
\cure is an abstraction, yet the f,
CI.I d. .l d orces that
are
create m soc1a an organizat· l .
d . f tona situ
cioos chat enve rom culture are • vention 1 ·
~-\ If we don't understand the ope P?Wer-
JIJ • b ration of
we ecome victim to th T
these forces, h em. o
·1\uscrate how t e concept of culture h 1
1
co
·\l
illuminate organizational situat' e ps
. b d ·b· 10ns, I
w1 begin y escn d . mg several s1· tuat1ons
. ased, witzerland-1 was asked as part of a
I have encountere m my experience as a
consultant.
FOUR BRIEF EXAMPLES
In the first case, that of Digital Equipment
Corporation (DEC), I was called in to help
a management group improve its com-
municat~o.n, inte:J'ersonal relationships,
and declSlon makmg. After sitting in on
a numb~r of meeti~gs, I observed, among
other dungs, (1) h1gh levels of interrupt-
ing, confrontation, and debate; (2) exces-
sive emotionality about proposed courses of
action; (3) great frustration over the diffi-
culty of getting a point of view across; and.
(4) a sense that every member of the group
wanted to win all the time.
Over a period of several months, I made
many suggestions about better listening,
less interrupting, more orderly processing of
the agenda, the potential negative effects
of high emotionality and conflict, and the
need to reduce the frustration level. The
group members said that the suggestions
were helpful, and they modified certain
aspects of their procedure; for example,
they scheduled more time for some of their
meetings. However, the basic pattern did
. . . IC I nd Leadership 3rd ed. (San Francisco: Josscy-Bass), pp. 3-23.
Schem, E. H. (2004). Orgamtanona u ture a
Reprinted by permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
349
not change N0
matter what kind of inter-
group rem a~temd Phted, the basic style of the
I ame t e same.
Com n the second case, that of the Ciba-Geigy
and ptny-a large multinational chemical
t
B Sar~aceutical company located in
broa er cons 1t · . to'help create
. f, u atton proJect,
8 c1tmate or inn
th f, l . .
ovation man organization
~t e t 8 need to become more flexible in
hr ~r to respond to its increasingly dynamic
USl~ess environment. The organization
cons1Sted of many different business units
geographical units, and functional groups'.
As I got to know more about these units and
~heir problems, I observed that some very
innovative things were going on in many
places in the company. I wrote several
memos that described these innovations
and presented other ideas from my own
experience. I gave the memos to my con~
tact person in the company with the request
that he distribute them to the various geo-
graphic and business unit managers who
needed to be made aware of these ideas.
After some months, I discovered that
those managers to whom I had personally
given the memo thought it was helpful
and on target, but rarely, if ever, did they
pass it on, and none were ever distributed
by my contact person. I also suggested
meetings of managers from different units
to stimulate lateral communication, but
found no support at all for such meetings.
No matter what I did, I could not seem to
get information flowing, especially laterally
across divisional, functional, or geographi-
cal boundaries. Yet everyone agreed in
'
153
r Organizarion Ciiltitr .,._h
350
principle that innovation would be stimu-
lated by more lateral communicacion and
encouraged me to keep on "he1pmg. . II · · ·
I did not really understand the forces
operating in ... these cases until I began to
examine my own assumptions about how
things should work in these organizations
and began to test whether my assump-
tions fitted those operating in my client's
systems. This step-examining the shared
assumptions in the organization or group
one is dealing with and comparing them to
one's own-takes one into cultural analysis
and will be the focus from here on.
It turned out that at DEC, an assumption
was shared by senior managers and most
of the other members of the organization:
that one cannot determine whether or not
something is "true" or "valid" unless one
subjects the idea or proposal to intensive
debate; and further, that only ideas that
survive such debate are worth acting on,
and only ideas that survive such scrutiny
will be implemented. The group assumed
that what they were doing was discovering
truth, and in this context being polite to
each other was relatively unimportant. I
became more helpful to the group when I
realized this and went to the flip chart and
just started to write down the various ideas
they were processing. If someone was inter-
rupted, I could ask them to restate their
point instead of punishing the interrupter.
The group began to focus on the items on
the chart and found that this really did help
their communication and decision process.
I had finally understood and entered into an
essential element of their culture instead of
imposing my own.
At Ciba-Geigy I eventually discovered
that there was a strong shared assumption
that each manager's job was his or her pri-
vate "turf," not to be infringed on. The
strong impression was communicated that
one's job is like one's home, and if some-
one gives one unsolicited information, it
is like walking into one':; home uninvited.
Sending memos to people implies that they
do not already know what is in the memo,
and that is potentially insulting. In this
154
e 1 eory
organization managers prided the
on knowing whatever they needed t~klves
to do their job. Had I understood h~ow
would have asked for a list of the na t 15 • I
the managers and sent the memo d~es of
. They wou Id h ave accepted itireqt
to them. f Y
me because I was the paid consultant ror:n
exp~rt ... , and
To make sense of such situations req .
taking a cultural perspective; leaming t uires
the world through cultural lenses; beco: ~ee
competent in cultural analysis-by whi h1
mean being able to perceive and decipher
the cultural forces that operate in grou
. .
orgamzauons, and occupations.
. 0 nee we ps,
learn to see the world through cultural
lenses, all kinds of things begin to make
sense that initially were mysterious, frus-
trating, or seemingly stupid.
CULTURE: AN EMPIRICALLY BASED
ABSTRACTION
Culture as a concept has had a long and
checkered history. It has been used by the
layman as a word to indicate sophistica-
tion, as when we say that someone is very
"cultured." It has been used by anthropolo-
gists to refer to the customs and rituals that
societies develop over the course of their
history. In the last several decades it has
been used by some organizational research-
ers and managers to refer to the climate and
practices that organizations develop around
their handling of people, or to the espoused
values and credo of an organization.
In this context, managers speak of devel•
oping the "right kind of culture," a "cul-
ture of quality" or a "culture of customer
service," suggesting that culture has to do
with certain values chat managers are try·
ing to inculcate in their organizations. Also
implied in this usage is the assumption that
there are better or worse cultures and11str0 °;,
ger or weaker cultures, and that t h e n 1.
·g1t
kind of culture will influence how effectt
the organization is. In the managerial hit·
. . . t at
erature there is often the ,mp11catwn .
havmg. a culture is necessary 1orr
e
ffecnve
r ConceJJL of Organiz ational Ci«lture • wn
fhC · w ny Bother?
-1orrna.nce, and that the stronge r th
Pen' che more e f:c1ecttve . the organ· e cu l.
ture, h .
1iat1on
R esearch ers ave suppor ted some f h·
.c. d·
g nn mgs that co lt esel
•
·ews by reportm
vi
"scrength" or certam • k· d
m s of culture su tura
. 1 corre-
late with econom tc penorm ance (Denis on
1990; Kotter and Hesket t, 1992; Sorens en'
z002). Consu ltants have touted "cultur~
sUrveys" and have . .claime l d that they can
·=prove
\1'• orgamz.
at1ona perform ance b y
•
helping orgam zauons create certain kinds
of cultures, but these claims are based on
very differe nt definit ions of culture tha
what I will be arguing for here. As we win
see, many of these usages of the word culture
display not only a superficial and incorre ct
view of culture , but also a danger ous ten-
dency to evalua te particu lar cultures in an
absolute way and to suggest that there actu-
ally are "right" culture s for organizations.
As we will also see, whethe r or not a culture
is "goo d" or "bad ," "funct1on
· a11y euectiv
a e"
or not, depend s not on the culture alone
but on the relatio nship of the culture to th~
environ ment in which it exists.
Perhaps the most intrigu ing aspect of
culture as a concep t is that it points us to
phenomena that are below the surface, that
are powerful in their impact but invisible
and to a consid erable degree unconscious.
In that sense, culture is to a group what
personality or charac ter is to an individual.
We can see the behavi or that results, but
often we canno t see the forces undern eath
that cause certain kinds of behavi or. Yet,
just as our person ality and charac ter guide
and constra in our behavi or, so does culture
guide and constra in the behavi or of mem-
bers of a group throug h the shared norms
that are held in that group.
To compli cate matter s further , one can
view personality and charac ter as the accu-
mulation of cultura l learnin g that an indi-
vidual has experie nced in the family, the
p·eer group, the school , the commu nity,
and the occupa tion. In this sen~e, culture is
Within us as individ uals and yet constan tly
evolving as we join and create new groups
that eventually create new culture s. Cultu_re
as a concep t is thus an abstrac tion but its
155
l
351
Il
behavioral and attitud inal conseq uences
are very concre te indeed .
If an abstract concep t is to be useful to
our thinkin g, it should be observ able and
also increase our unders tanding of a set
of events that are otherwise myster ious or
n~t well understood. From this point of
view, l will argue that we must avoid the
superficial models of culture and build on
the deeper, more complex anthro pologi cal
models. Culture as a concep t will be most
useful if it helps us to better unders tand
the hidden and comple x aspects of life in
groups, organizations, and occupa tions, and
we cannot obtain this unders tanding if we
use superficial definitions.
WHAT NEEDS TO BE EXPLA INED?
Most of us, in our roles as studen ts, employ -
ees, managers, researchers, or consul tants,
work in and have to deal with groups and
organizations of all kinds. Yet we contin ue
to find it amazingly difficult to unders tand
and justify much of what we observ e and
experience in our organizational life. Too
much seems to be bureau cratic or politi-
cal or just plain irratio nal-as in the four
cases that I described at the beginn ing of
this chapter.
People in positions of author ity, espe-
cially our immed iate bosses, often frustra te
us or act incomprehensibly; those we con-
sider the leaders of our organiz ations often
disappoint us. When we get into argum ents
or negotiations with others, we often can-
not understand how our oppone nts could
take such ridiculous positio ns. When we
observe other organizations, we often find it
incomprehensible that smart people could
do such dumb things. We recognize cultura l
differences at the ethnic or nation al level
but find them puzzling at the group, organ~
izational, or occupa tional level.
As managers, when we tty to change the
behavlo r of subordinates, we often encoun -
ter· resistance to change to an extent that
seems beyond reason . We observ e depart-
ments in our organization that seem to be
 Organization Culture Theory
352

the unfamiliar an_d seem!ngl_v irrational

and We
more interested in fighting with each ocher b havior of people m orgamzat1ons,
only
than getting the job done. We see commu- w~ll have a deeper understanding not
misunder stand ings ps of peop le or orga n-
nication problems and of why various grou
between group members chat shou ld not be izations can be so diffe rent, but also why
occurring between reasonable people. We it is so hard co change them. Even more
explain in detail why something different important, if we understand culture better
must be done, yet people continue to act as we will better understand ourselves--better
if they had not heard us. understand the forces acting within us that
As leaders who are crying to get our define who we are, chat reflect the groups
organizations to become more effective in
with which we identify and to which we
the face of severe environm enta l pressures,
want ro belong.
we are sometimes amazed at the degree to
which individuals and groups in the organ-
ization will continue to behave in obviously CULTURE AND LEADERSHIP
ineffective ways, often threatening the very
survival of the organization. As we try to When we examine culture and leadership
get things done that involve other groups, closely, we see that they are two sides of the
we often discover that they do not commu- same coin; neither can really be understood
nicate with each other and that the level by itself. On the one hand, cultural norms
of conflict between groups in organizations define how a given nation or organizations
and in the community is often astonish- will define leadership-who will get pro-
ingly high. moted, who will get the attention of fol-
As teachers, we encounter the some- lowers. On the other hand, it can be argued
times mysterious phenomenon that differ- that the only thing of real importance that
ent classes behave completely differently leaders do is to create and manage culture;
from each other, even though our material chat the unique talent of leaders is their
and teaching style remains the same. As ability to understand and work with cul-
employees considering a new job, we real- ture; and that it is an ultimate act of leader-
ize that companies differ greatly in their
ship to destroy culture when it is viewed as
approach, even in the same industry and
dysfunctional.
geographic locale. We feel these differ-
If one wishes to distinguish leader-
ences even as we walk through the doors of
from management or administration,
different organizations, such as restaurants, ship
banks, stores, or airlines. one can argue that leadership creates and
cultures, while management and
As members of different occupations, changes
ration act with in a culture. By
we are aware that being a doctor, lawyer, administ
leadership in this manner, I am
engineer, accountant, or other professional defining
that culture is easy to create
involves not only the learning of technical not implying
that formal leaders are the
skills but also the adoption of certain values or change, or
ers of culture. On the con-
and nonns chat define our occupation. lf we only determin
s to chose elements of
violate some of these nonns we can be thrown trary, .. . culture refer
that are most stable
out of the occupation. But where do these a group or organization
come from and how do we reconcile the fact and least malleable.
chat each occupation cons iders its norms and Culture is the result of a complex group
values to be the correct ones? learning process that is only partially influ-
The concept of culture helps to expl ain enced by leader behavior. But if the group's
elements of
all of these phenomena and to normalize survival is threatened because
of its culture have become mala dapt ed, it is
them. If we understand the dynamics
ip at all
culture, we will be less likely to be puzzled, ultimately the function of leadersh
and
irritated, and anxious when we encounte levels of the organization co recognize
r

156
r
ofOrganizaticmal Culture: Wh" B h
CQ11ceP' J ot er?
1ne
ething about thi~ situation. It is in
00 soffl se chat lead~rsh1p and culture are
chis sen ally intertwined.
ceptu
,011
~.¢ ) A FORMAL DEFINITION
1~ cOL'fl)RE .
we apply the concept of culture to
~be~' organizations, and occupations, we
grotl)rnost certain to have conceptual and
are 3 tic confusion, because such social
se~an are themselves difficult to define
ll111ts biguously. I will use as the critical
11am
ll fi . g charactens• t1c• f
o a group the fact
01
de .~ members have a shared history. Any
~:I
th3 unit that has some kind of shared his-
soc will have evolved a culture, with the
col)' gth of that culture dependent on the
;rrenth of its existence, the stability of the
;~p's membership, and. the_ emotional
intensity of the actual historical experi-
ces they have shared. We all have a
en
commonsense notio · n of th'1s phenom
enon,
yet it is difficult to ~efi~e it abstractly. In
talking about orgamzanonal culture with
colleagues and members of organizations, I
often find that we agree that "it" exists and
that it is important in its effects, but when
we cry to define it, we have completely dif-
ferent ideas of what "it" is.
To make matters worse, the concept of
culture has been the subject of consider-
able academic debate in the last twenty-
five years and there are various approaches
to defining and studying culture (for
example, those of Hofstede, 1991; Trice
and Beyer, 1993; Schultz, 1995; Deal and
Kennedy, 1999; Cameron and Quinn, 1999;
Ashkanasy, Wilderom, and Peterson, 2000;
and Martin, 2002). This debate is a healthy
sign in that it testifies to the importance of
culture as a concept, but at the same time it
creates difficulties for both the scholar and
the practitioner if definitions are fuzy,y and
usages are inconsistent.. .. I will give only
hquick overview of this range of usage and
~en offer a precise and formal definition
at. makes the most sense from my point
of view.. ..
11'I
353
Commonly useJ wmds relating to culture
~mphasize one of its critical aspects-the
idea that certain things in groups are shared
or held in commm1. The major categories of
?bservables that are associated with culture
m this sense are shown in Exhibit 34.1.
All of these concepts relate to culture
or reflect culture in that they deal with
~hings that group members share or hold
m common, but nont of them can use-
fully be thought of as "the culture" of an
organization or group. lf one asks why we
need the word culture at all when we have
so many other concepts-such as norms,
v_alues, behavior patterns, rituals, tradi-
tions, and so on-o ne recognizes that the
word culture adds several other critical ele-
ments to the concept of sharing: structural
stability, depth, breadth, and patterning or
integration.
EXHIBIT 34.1 VARIOUS CATEGORIES
USED TO DESCRIBE CULTURE.
Obseroed behavioral regularities when people
interact: the language they use, the customs
and traditions that evolve, and the rituals
they employ in a wide variety of situations
(Goffman, 1959, 1967; Jones, Moore, and
Snyder, 1988; Trice and Beyer, 1993, 1985;
Van Maanen, 1979b).
Group norms: the implicit standards and
values that evolve in working groups, such as
the particular norm o( "a fair day's work for a fair
day's pay" that evolved among workers in the
Bank Wiring Room in the Hawthorne studies
(Homans, 1950; Kilmann and Saxton, 1983).
Espoused values: the articulated, publicly
announced principles and values chat the
group claims to be trying to achieve, such as
"product quality" or "price leadership" (Deal
and Kennedy, 1982, 1999).
Formal philosophy: the broad policies and
ideological principles that guide a group's actions
toward stockholders, employees, customers, and
other stakeholders, such as the highly publicized
"HP Way" of Hewlett-Packard (Ouchi, 1981;
Pascale and Athos, 1981; Packard, 1995).
R11les of the game: the implicit, unwritten
rules for getting along in the organi.:ation; "the
ropes" that a newcomer must learn in order to
157
 Organization Culture 7'.Lneory

354
ply that it is
something is "cultural," we im e.
"the way we do ly shared, but also sta h·, becaus it
ble
b ; Van no t on ac 1ev e a sen
become an accepte,? mem. er; 1968 , 1978
defi n
es the group. On. ce. we . se
.
things around here (Schemti, and Funkhouser, of gro up identity, 1t- 1s ou r _m aJor stabiliz
197 9a, 197 9b; Rit
Maane n, en up easily.
jng force and will not be giv
1987). en som e members
Climate: the feeling that is con
veyed i~ a Culture survives even wh re is hard
th~ way m . h of the organization depart . Cu ltu
group by the physical layout an~ mbers value
co change becau~e gro~p me
ation mte~ct wrt
which members o( the organiz
other outside rs meaning and
each other with customers, or
n, ZOO O; stability in that 1t provides
te~o
(A shk an~ , Wilderom, and Pe_ 1968 ). predictability·
Schneider, 1990; Tag iuri and Lrrwm,
peten~i~
Embedded skills: the special com ~lrsh,_ng
in acc om
displayed by group members Depth
e certain th10 gs unconscious
certain tasks, the ability to mak
ti~n to gen_era•
Culture is the deepest, often
that gets passed on from ge~era refore , less tan.
articulated m part of a group and is, the s. From
tion without necessarily bemg gible and less vi~ible than oth
er pan
197 8; Cook and
writing (Argyris and Schon, the concepts
Yanow, 1993; Henderso n and Cla rk, 1990; this point of view, most of
ht of as mani-
Peters and Watennan, 198 2). reviewed above can be thoug
y are not the
Habits of thinking, mental models,
and linguistic festations of culture, but the
by culture. Note
paradigms: the shared cog nitive fram es that essence of what we mean
language deeply embed-
guide the perception s, tho ugh t, and that when something is more
and taught to
used by the members o( a group ded it also gains stability.
ialization process
new members in the early soc
200 1; Van Maanen,
(Douglas, 1986; Hofstede,
199 4).
1979b; Senge and others, Breadth
Shared meanings: the emergent und t with
erstandings
A third characteristic of cul
ture is that once
rac of a group's
it has developed, it covers all
s as the y inte
created by group member ch, 1983;
rtz, 197 3; Sm irci ive; it influ-
each other (as in Gee
4; Weick, 199 5). functioning. Culture is pervas
Van Maanen and Barley, 198 ences all aspects of how an
organization
bols: the
"Root metaphors" or integrating sym deals with its primary task, its
various envi-
lve to cha rac terize
ways in which groups evo erations. Not
ich may or may not be ronments, and its internal op
themselves, wh this sense, but
ome embodied
appreciated consciously but bec er material all groups have cultures in
en we refer to
in buildings, office layout, and
oth the concept connotes that wh
referring to all
artifacts of the group. This leve
l of the culture the culture of a group we are
aes the tic response
reflects the emotional and of its operations.
trasted wit h the cognitive
of members as con
gliardi, 1990;
or evaluative response (as in Ga
rgan, and
Hatch, 1990; Pondy, Frost, Mo Patterning or Integration
Dandridge, 1983; Schultz, 199
5). t is implied by
The fourth characteristic tha
Formal rituals and celebrations: the t reflect
ways in t further lends
the concept of culture and tha
which a group celebrates key
events tha egration of the
stability is patterning or int
"passages" by
es or imp orta nt gm or "gestalt"
elements into a larger paradi
important valu
com pletion of
members, such as promotion, s elements and
esto nesthat ties together the variou
(as in Deal
important projects, and mil Culture some,
and Kennedy, 1982, 199 9; Tri ce that lies at a deeper level.
and Beyer
' mate, values,
1993). how implies that rituals, cli
int o a coher·
and behaviors tie together
integration is
ent whole; this patterning or
by "culture."
Structural Stability the essence of what we mean
ultimately
of structur I Such patterning or integration
Culture implies some level d to make our
we say th: t derives from the human nee
stability in the group. When ord y as we
erl
environment as sensible and

158
 . , ,t uf Organizatiimal CultttT
1~eC0ncc1 ". \Vn
'"· wn" B
J other?

(Weick, 1995). Disorder 355

cit'l akes us anxious, so we or s
will wenkeless-
f'less drn1ce that anxiety by de that the ~ro
re velopinor. hard rnembe t up accomplishe
ctl . Lcent an d pre d'
coll are and how they view 0 f h
515
b\
1cta e
sh
g 0 more to e h
and a.~ l 0thbeer-wil\ the
s its task an
eel good about their relationd the
ships
_1.. j!\g
o• snizationa l cu ltures , hk , ould 1.oe . Thaw ,a ues fou nd er's bel iefs
, 1 rgll
0 op as gro f \
e other l us and m . con firme d and rcm . forcc d
\ up s o pe op
de"e of an d cope . h h . uggle to mak'e str cu tures as sha ~t important, come to he rec ,
wit t eu worlds" (T . e indioid~ ~ at was originall og niz ed
5ense
d1,eyer, 1993' P· 4) · nce act1.on whvie
y the founder's
w of the world leads to sha
ao \{oW then should we thi reco '. . ic · h 1·f red
nk about the • successful, leads to a sha
ce" of culture and how Tl gnitton that the founder red
11
esse(\ c. . · 1 Th should 1 "had it right."
a\\u deun de group wil n act again on
foftl1 , e it.
d fi . . e mo st usefu\ we an values a \dthe these beliefs
coa r rive at a e mt 1on f
o someth· way f \ ·u n • I·f lt• conti' nu
l . h 1
u ' ~ eventually conclude es to be success-
ct as cu tur t ink in dyin ga
a~b fa e is to n .s the corre tha t it now has
e"o\utionarv terms. li we ~~ lf Ct n way to chink, feel, and
act.
can understand 'on the other hand the fou
where culture comes fro an d nd er's beliefs
e"o\ves, then we c~n g~sp
m and how it will va\_ues do n~t lead 'to suc
something that cess, che group
is abstract; that exms m fail and disappear or will
a group's uncon- 1
ba~ership until someone seek other
scious, yet that _has powerfu is found whose
l influences on ehefs and values will lead
a group's behaviour. co
culture formation process wi success. The
ll then revolve
around that new leader.
With continued
r~lnforcement, the group
gOW DOES CULTURE will become less
FO RM? and less conscious of these
belie
ues , and it will begin to tre fs and val-
Culture forms in two ways. at them more
lSl and more as nonnegotiable
interaction in an unstructur pontaneous this process continues, the
assumptions. As
ed group gradu- se
ally leads to patterns and no
rms of behaviour will gradually drop out of assumptions
aw
that become the culture of tha
t group-often come to be taken for grante areness and
d.
within just hours of the
group's formation. tions come to be taken for As assump-
ln more formal groups an
individual creates become part of the identity granted they
of the group; are
the group or becomes its lea taught to newcomers as the
der. This could way to think,
be an entrepreneur starti feel, and act; and, if violat
ng a new com- ed, produce dis-
pany, a religious person cre comfort, anxiety, ostracism
, an
ing, a political leader creati
ating a follow- excommunication. This co d eventually
ng a new party, ncept of assump•
a teacher starting a new cla tions, as opposed to belie
ss, or a manager fs and values,
taking over a new departm implies nonnegotiability.
ent of an organ- If we are willing
hation . The individual fo to argue about something,
under-whether then it has not
an entrepreneur or just the become tal<en for granted.
convener of a Therefore, defi-
new group-will have nitions of culture that deal
certain personal with values must
visions, goals, beliefs, value specify that culture consists
s, and assump• of nonnegotiable
tions about how things sho values-which 1am calling
uld be . He or she assumptions.
will initially impose these on ln summary, we can think
of culture as
the group and/ the accumulated shared lea
or select members on the ba rning of a given
sis of their simi- group, covering behavio
larity of thoughts and value ral , emotional,
s. and cognitive elements of
We can think of this impo the group mem-
sition- as a pri- bers' total psychological
mary act of leadership, but functioning. For
it does not auto• such shared \earning to oc
cu
matically produce culture.
All it produces is be a history of shared expe r, there must
rie
compliance in the followers
to do what the tum, implies some stabil nce that, in
leader asks of them . Only ity of member~
if the resulting ship in the group . Give
behaviour leads to "succe n such stability
ss"-in the sense and a shared histor y, the
human need for

159

356
stabi lity, consistency, and meaning will
cause the various shared elements co ftTd
into patte rns that eventually can be ca e
a cultu re.
CUL TUR E FOR MAL LY DEF INE D
The culture of a group can now be defined
as a pattern of shared basic assumpcions that
was learned by a group as it solved ~ts probl~ms
of external adaptation and internal mtegrat1on,
that has worked well enough to be considered
valid and, therefore, to be taught to new mem~
bers as the correct way co perceive, think, and
feel in relation to those problems.
I am not arguing that all groups evolve
integ rated cultures in this sense. We all
know of groups, organizations, and societ-
ies in whic h certa in beliefs and values work
at cross purposes with othe r beliefs and val-
ues, leading to situations full of conflict and
ambiguity (Ma rtin, 2002). This may result
from insufficient stability of membership,
insufficient shared history of experience, or
the pres ence of many subgroups with differ•
ent kinds of shared experiences. Ambiguity
and conflict also result from the fact that
each of us belongs to many groups, so that
wha t we brin g to any given group is influ-
ence d by the assumptions that are appropri-
ate to our othe r groups.
But if the conc ept of culture is to have
any utility, it should draw our atten tion
to those things that are the prod uct of our
hum an need for stability, consistency, and
meaning. Cult ure formation is always, by
definition, a striving toward patte rnin g and
integration, even thou gh in man y groups
their actu al history of experiences pre•
vent s them from ever achi evin g a clear-cut,
unambiguous paradigm.
If a group's culture is the result of that
group's accumulated learning, how do we
describe and catalogue the cont ent of that
learning? All group and organizational
theories distinguish two majo r sets of prob-
lems that all groups, no matt er wha t their
size, must deal with: ( 1) survival, growth,
and adap tatio n in their envi ronm ent; and
160
Organization Culture Theory
(2) inter nal integ ratio n _t~at permits daily
functioning and the ab1ltty to adap t and
learn. Both of thes e areas of grou p function.
ing will reflect the larger cultu ral cont ext i
which rhe grou p exists and from which ar~
derived broa der and deep er basic assump.
cions abou t the natu re of reality, time, space
hum an natu re, and hum an relationships... :
At this poin t, it is imp orta nt to discuss
several othe r elem ents char are important
co our formal defi nitio n of cultu re.
The Process of Socialization.
Onc e a group has a cultu re, it will pass ele-
men ts of this cultu re on to new generations
of group mem bers (Louis, 1980; Schein,
1968; Van Maa nen, 1976; Van Maanen
and Sche in, 1979). Stud ying wha t new
members of grou ps are taug ht is, in fact, a
good way to disc over som e of the elements
of a cultu re; how ever , by this means one
only learns abou t surfa ce aspe cts of the
cult ure- espe ciall y beca use muc h of what is
at the hear t of a cultu re will not be revealed
in the rules of beha vior taug ht to newcom-
ers. It will only be reve aled to members as
they gain perm anen t statu s and are allowed
into the inne r circl es of the grou p in which
group secrets are shar ed.
On the othe r hand , how one learns
and the soci aliza tion processes to which
one is subj ecte d may inde ed reveal deeper
assumptions. To get at thos e deep er levels
one must try to unde rstan d the perceptions
and feelings that arise in criti cal situations,
and one mus t obse rve and inter view regular
members or "old -tim ers" to get an accurate
sense of the deep er-le vel assumptions that
are shar ed.
Can cultu re be learn ed thro ugh antici·
pato ry socia lizat ion or self,socialization?
Can new mem bers disc over for themselves
wha t the basic assu mpti ons are? Yes and no.
We certa inly know that one of the major
activ ities of any new mem ber whe n she
ente rs a new grou p is to deci pher the ope~-
ating norms and assu mpti ons. But this dee,,
pher ing can be successful only throu gh the
feedback that is mete d out by old members
 i:c/it of ( )rganiztttional Culture: W/i-v Both ,
l
fhC con . er. 357 ~I
'I

eW members as they experiment with

tt~J nt kinds of hehavior. In this sense cultural manifestation. Only aftt:r we have
a teacI·ung
. process going on ' discovered the deeper layers that I define as
d1riereis always
there though ,r . may he quite
. nnp
. Iicit and' the essence of culture can we specify what
even . is and what is not an artifact that reflects
stemat1c. the culture.
unsIfY the group d?es not .have shared
-ptions, as will sometimes be the
the new member's .mteract1on . with
assu11•
Id members w1·tt be a more creative pro-
case, Can a Large Organization or Occupation
Have One Culture?
o of building a culture. But once shared
the cu Iture survives
cess ptions exist, . My formal definition does not specify the
assu n1 h' h size of social unit to which it can legiti-
through teac mg ~ em to ne~comers. In mately be applied. Our experience with
h's regard culture 1s a mechanism of sociallarge organizations tells us that at a certain
t ~trol and can be the basis for explicitly
coanipu Iatmg
. size the variations among the subgroups is
members .mto perceiving, substantial, suggesting chat it might not be
tliinking, and feeling in certain ways (Van appropriate to talk of the culture of an IBM
Maanen and Kunda, 1989; Kunda, 1992; or a General Motors or Shell. In the evolu-
Schein, 1968) ... • tion of DEC over its thirty-five-year history
one can see both a strong overall corporate
culture and the growth of powerful subcul-
Behavior is Derivative, Not Central tures that reflected the larger culture but
This formal definition of culture does not also differed in important ways (Schein,
include oven behavior patterns (although 2003 ). In fact, the growing tensions among
some such behavior-particularly formal the subcultures were partly the reason why
rituals-does reflect cultural assumptions). DEC as an economic entity ultimately
Instead, it emphasizes that the critical failed to survive.
assumptions deal with how we perceive,
think about, and feel about things. Overt
behavior is always determined both by the Do Occupatitms Have Cultures?
cultural predisposition (the perceptions, If an occupation involves an intense period
thoughts, and feelings chat are patterned) of education and apprenticeship, there
and by the situational contingencies will certainly be a shared learning of atti-
that arise from the immediate external tudes, norms, and values that eventually
environment. will become taken-for-granted assump-
Behavioral regularities can occur for tions for the members of those occupations.
reasons other than shared culture. For It is assumed that the beliefs and values
example, if we observe that all members of learned during this time will remain stable
a group cower in the presence of a large, as assumptions even though the person
loud leader, this could be based on biologi- may not always be in a group of occupa-
cal, reflex reactions to sound and size, or tional peers. But reinforcement of those
on individual or shared learning. Such a assumptions occurs at professional meet-
behavioral regularity should not, therefore, ings and continuing education sessions,
be the basis for defining culture-though and by virtue of the face that the practice
we might later discover that, in a given of the occupation often calls for teamwork
group's experience, cowering is indeed a among several members of the occupa-
result of shared learning and, therefore, a tion, who reinforce each other. One reason
manifestation of deeper shared assump· why so many occupations rely heavily on
tions. To put it another way, when we peer-group evaluation is that this process
observe behavior regularities, we do not preserves and protects the culture of the
know whether or not we are dealing with a occupation.

161
r Organization Culture Th
358
Determining which sets of assump-
tions apply to a whole society, or a "'.ho.le
organization, or a whole subgroup with~n
an organization or occupation, sho~ld e
done empirically. I have found all kmds of
combinations; their existence is one reason
why some theorists emphasize that orga~-
izational cultures can be integrated, dif-
ferentiated, or fragmented (Martin, 20~2~.
But for the purpose of defining culture, It is
important to recognize that a fragmented or
differentiated organizational culture usually
reflects a multiplicity of subcultures, and
within those subcultures there are shared
assumptions.
Are Some Assumptions More Important
than Others?
... [O]rganizations do seem to function
primarily in terms of some core of assump-
tions, some smaller set that can be thought
of as the cultural paradigm or the govern-
ing assumptions, or as critical "genes" in
the "cultural DNA." For the researcher, the
problem is that different organizations will
have different paradigms with different core
assumptions. As a result, cultural typologies
can be very misleading. One could mea-
sure many organizations on the same core
dimensions, but in some of those organiza-
tions a particular dimension could be cen-
tral to the paradigm, whereas in others its
influence on the organization's behavior
could be quite peripheral.
If the total set of shared basic assump-
tions of a given organizational culture can
be thought of as its DNA, then we can
examine some of the individual genes ih
terms of their centrality or potency in forc-
ing certain kinds of growth and behavior,
and other genes in terms of their power to
inhibit or prevent certain kinds of behav-
ior. We can then see that certain kinds of
cultural evolution are determined by the
"genetic structure," the kind of "autoim-
mune system" tha t the organizatio n gen-
erates, and the impact of "mutations and
hybridization."
162
eory
5t.JMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
. .. [A]ny group with a sta?le membership and
a history of shared learning will have devel-
oped some level of_ culture, but a group that
has had either considerable turnover of mem.
bers and leaders or a history lacking in an
kind of challenging events may well lack any
shared assumptions. Not every collection J
people develops a culture; in fact, we tend to
use the term group rather than, say, crowd or
collection of people only when there has been
enough of a shared history for some degree of
culture formation to have taken place.
Once a set of shared assumptions has come
to be taken for granted, it determines much
of the group's behavior, and the rules and
norms are taught to newcomers in a social-
ization process that is itself a reflection of
culture. To define culture one must go below
the behavioral level, because behavioral reg-
ularities can be caused by forces other than
culture. Even large organizations and entire
occupations can have a common culture if
there has been enough of a history of shared
experience. Finally, I noted that the shared
assumptions will form a paradigm, with more
or less central or governing assumptions driv-
ing the system, much as certain genes drive
the genetic structure of human DNA.
Culture and leadership are two sides of the
same coin, in that leaders first create cultures
when they create groups and organizations.
Once cultures exist they determine the cri-
te ria for leadership and thus determine who
will or will not be a leader. But if elements
of a culture become dysfunctional, it is che
unique function of leadership to be able to
perceive the functional and dysfunctional
elements of the existing culture and to man-
age cultural evolution and change in such a
way that the group can survive in a chang-
ing environment.
The bottom line for leaders is chat if they
do not become conscious of the cultures in
which they are embedded, those cultures
will manage them. Cultural understanding
is desirable for all of us, but it is essential co
leaders if they are to lead . . ..
' ceJJI of Organizational Culcttrc: Whv
'(lie C(J11

~J $N CE S
· Bmher?
359
l,,

Humans, G. 0 950)
& Schon, D. A. 0 978) • 0 rgan New York· H . The human group.
·s C·• · • Jaques, E. 098~) arcourr Brace Jovano
vich.
t,rtf.ri '·onal teaming. Reading, MA: Add tson. :
,ziJLI Heineman · The forms of time . London
'#esleY•
N. M., Wil derom, C· p. M., 1:_ Jaques, E. 09 8; ..
1.kar1aSy, (E
Handb00k
\.)!.
ton VA •C · Reqursue organization. Arling-
f.S'' P rerson, M. F. ds.) (2000). of ' · ason HaII ·
eanizational culture and climate · Th ousand Jones M· O·, Moore M D & s d
ore
oaks,
CA- Sage .
. ('Eds.) (1988 ) 1' . · ·, ny er, R. C.
n K. S., & Quinn, R.. E. (1999) . 0 ,ag. . sand Oaks, CA-1rde organizations. Thou-
/"ofllerO I d h mg .
organizational cultu Kees d y , MFR· age. & .
v> osing an c ang e rres D. (1984). The
~eading, MA : Add ison -Wesley. re. neurotic~ · .' ·: M~ller, nosi ng and chang•
zatto
gan, . n: Diag
s.D. N.,. &.Yan11ow, D.. (1993).nalcuofIture
inrr
· 't, counter,,. d agement.
San Fran !"c, ucuv e style s of man
oo k ,
C 3nd orgamzattona eammg. Jour crsco, CA: Joss ey-B ass.
'[
K1 mann RH &S
Management Inquiry, 2(4), 373-390. Thel('I . ·• axton,M.J.(1983).ey.
eal T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1982). Cor
- p· br mann-Saxton culture. gapIsmv
p pqrace cultures. Reading , MA : Add ison . ucs urgh ' PA·· 0 rgam.zat1ona Design
Consu Itams.
Wesley. ure
peal, T. E., & Kennedy, A. A. (1999).
The new Kott:;J- P., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Cult
k: Pers eus. Performa nce. New Yor k: Free Pres s.
,orporare cult ures . New Yor
nd
Ku a, _G. (1992 ). Eng inee ring cultu re.
Denison, D. ~- (1990). _Corporare culture and e . _Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Pres
s.
organizanonal effectweness. New York: Wil sens e mak -
k. Y Lout~, M. R. (1980). Surprise and
l)ouglas, M. (1986). How institutions thin ing. Administrative Science l"\.·- terly1 25 1
vers ity Pres s.
Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Uni 226-25 l. l,,!l<U T

artifacts:
Gagliardi, P. (Ed.) (1990). Symbols and LouiS, M. R. (1981). A cultural perspec
tive on
e landscap e. New York: ent
Views of the corporat organizations. Human Systems Managem '
Walter de Gruyter . 2, 246-258.
GeertZ, C. (I 973 ). The interpretation of
cultures. Map-
Marti~, J. (2002). Organizational culture:
New York: Basic Books. ping the terrain. Tho usan d Oak s, CA : Sage.
self in th or
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of Martin,]., & Powers, M. E. (198 3). Tru
d
bled ay. corporate propaganda: The valu e of a goo
everyday life. New York: Dou
& othe rs (Ed s.),
Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums. New Yor
k: war st?ry·. In L. R. Pondy
Doubleday Anchor. Orgamzac,onal symbolism. Greenwich, CT:
- JAI Press.
Goffman, E. (1967). Jnteraction ritual. Haw , MA:
thorne, NY: Ald ine. Ouchi, W. G. (1981). Theory Z. Reading
office Addison-Wesley.
Hatch, M. J. (1990). The symbolics of es of
and Ouchi, W. G., & Johnson, J. (1978). Typ
design. In P. Gagliardi (Ed.), Symbols organizational con trol and thei r rela tion -
.
artifacts. New York: Walter de Gruyter ship to emotion al well -being. Adm inist ra•
s the futu re.
Havrylyshyn, B. (1980). Road map to
tive Science Quarterly, 23, 293- 317.
Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. Packard, D. (1995). The HP way . New
York:
Hende15on, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (199
0). HarperCollins.
Architectural innovation: The reco nfigura- The art
and Pascale, R. T., & Athas, A.G. (1981).
tion of existing product technologies ofJapanese managem ent. New York : Simon
ra•
the failure of established firms. Administ & Schuster.
tive Science Quarterly, 35, 9-30.
· York:
s. Peters, T. ]. (1987). Thriving on chaos. New
orga niza tion
Hofstede, G. (1991 ). Cultures and Knopf.
982 ).
H London: McGraw-Hill. Peters, T. ]., & Waterm an, R.H., Jr. (1 per-
Y ork: Har
of5rede, G. (2001 ). Culture's cons equences In search of exce llence. New
(2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Collins.
Ost ed. 1980).

163
r
360
Pettigrew, A. M. (1979). On studying organ-
izational cultures. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 24, 570-581.
Pandy, L. R., Frost, P. J., Morgan, G., & ·
Dandridge, T. (Eds.) ( 1983 ). Organizational
symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAi Press.
Ritti, R.R., & Funkhouser, G. R. (1987). The
ropes to skip and the ropes to know. Colum-
bus, OH: Grid (3rd ed.; 1st ed. 1982).
Schein, E. H . (1968). Organizational socializa-
tion and the profession of management.
Industrial Management Review, 9, 1-15.
Schein, E. H. (1969). Process consultation: Its
· role in organization development. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schein, E. H. (1978). Career dynamics: Match-
ing individual and organizational needs. Read-
ing, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schein, E. H. (1980). Organizational psychology
(3rd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall (1st ed. 1965).
Schein, E. H. (2003 ). DEC is dead; long live
DEC. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Schein, E. H., & Bennis, W. G. (1965). Per-
sonal and organizational change through group
methods. New York: Wiley.
Schneider, B. (Ed.) (1990). Organizational climate
and culture. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schultz, M. (1995). On studying organizational
cultures. New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Senge, P. M ., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., Smith, B. J.,
& Kleiner, A. (1994). The fifth discipline
field book. New York: Doubleday Currency.
Smircich, L. ( 1983) Concepts of culture and
organizational analysis. Administrative Sci-
ence Quarterly, 28, 339-358. '
Sorensen, J.B. (2002). The strength of corpo-
rate culture and the reliability of firm per-
formance. Administrative Science Quarterly,
47, 70-91.
Steward, J. H. (1955). Theory of culture change.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Tagiuri, R., & Litwin, G. H. (Eds.) (1968).
Organizational climate: Exploration of a
concept. Boston: Division of Research,
Harvard Graduate School of Business.
Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J.M. (1984). Study-
ing organizational cultures through rites
I and ceremonials. Academy of Management
Review, 9, 65 3-669.
II
I
I
164
Organization Culture T'h
eory
Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J.M. (1985). Usin .
organizational rites to change cultu
R.H. Kilmann, M. J. Saxton, R. s/e.
gt'x
n
and associates. Gaining control of therpa,
rate culture. San Francisco, CA: Joss;;r,0 -
Bass, 370-399.
Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J.M. (1993). The
cultures of work organizations. En~lewa0 d
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Van Maanen, J. (1976). Breaking in: Social·
tion at work. In R. Dubin (Ed.), Handb'
of work organization and society. Skokie,
2
t
~I.-
Rand McNally. ·
Van ~aanen, J. ( 1977). Experiencing organiza.
trons. In J. Van Maanen (Ed.), Organiza-
tional careers: Some new perspectives. New
York: Wiley.
Van Maanen, J. (1979a). The fact of fiction in
organizational ethnography. AdministTative
Science Quarterly, 24, 539-550.
Van Maanen, J. (1979b). The self, the
situation, and the rules of interpersonal
relations. In W. Bennis and others, Essays
in interpersonal dynamics. Florence, KY:
Dorsey Press.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On
writing ethnography. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S. R. (1984). Occu-
pational communities: Culture and control
in organizations. ln B. M. Staw & L. L.
Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational
behavior (Vol. 6). Greenwich, CT: JAI
Press.
Van Maanen, J., & Kunda, G. (1989) . Real
feelings: Emotional expression and
organizational culture. In B. Staw (Ed.),
Research in organizational behavior (Vol.
11 ). Greenwich, CT: JAi Press.
Van Maanen, J., & Schein, E. H. (1979).
T award a theory of organizational social-
ization. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings
(Eds.}, Research in organizational behavior
(Vol. l ). Greenwich, CT: JAi Press.
Weick, K. ( 1995). Sensemaking in organizations.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wilkins, A. L. ( 1983 ). Organizational stories
as symbols which control the organization.
In L. R. Pandy and others (Eds.), Organ·
izational symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAl
Press.
 f

.c11~ipt~:ts·<'. ,!,-::.. :·, _/ .-\

f i6fi~,~j;1
.i~~§j j~~Jjfi~ik

One of the major debates in organizational change relates to the

contributions made by those who lead it. Different theories of leadership are
introduced in this chapter together with a look at the classic portrayals of
organizational leaders. Then a critical look at these portrayals is taken to see
how they can be interpreted from alternative perspectives. Issues regarding
resistance to change and the identification of strategies for managing it are
also recognized.

Learning objectives
By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:

e explain the differences between leaders and managers;

e discuss whether there is 'one best way' of leading or whether leadership

style and behaviour should vary according to the circumstances;

e take a critical stance in relation to conventional portrayals of

organizational leaders;

e assess the compatibility of different leadership approaches with

different types of change situations;

• identify sources and causes of resistance to change and discuss ways

of countering it.

167
r
• _C_h~p~~:~:{ _Leadership ~ild c~ange

~ ;•e Management and _l=~~=':5hip

. . ·ng no not yes. It is very easy to say yes.
The art of leadership 15 sayi ' .
. (Tony Blair, 1994)
. ·t on management, the French engineer Henri F
One of the earliest wn ers . ayo1
ong the first to describe management as a ,
who died in 1925, was a m .. . . set of
. d forecasting orgamzmg, coordmating, commanding
processes; planning an ' . ...... _ -.... .. _. and
. f these labels are somewhat unfashionable n,ow but aro ......
controlling. 5ome o . ,"":.,,:, . und-
. f W Id w 1 they were ·not out of place and are""·still·.aJ a~.oescripti <
the time o or ar ·- ·~·.·· + ~":..;__~ on
of what many managers do. Around the same time as Fayol\Fre~erick:ra:ylol;
introduced his principles of 'scientific management'. and caf~l!zed interest i~;
productivity and production methods and hence m orgamzmg. Interest in
understanding how to improve the performance of managers grew strongly in
the interwar and post-war periods, particularly in the US as management theory:
kept pace with the industrial and economic growth of the early to mid twenti-.
II eth century. Indeed, advances in production methods and the huge scale of
some industrial enterprises increased the pressure for a new way of looking ii;
organizations and understanding leadership was a part of this.
Studies of what managers and leaders actually do, however, are less common"
than one might think. One of the best known studies of managers is Watso~-,~-
(1994) ethnographic account of his time in a UK manufacturing company. H~:
defined management as, ' ... organizing, pulling things together and along in a'.
general direction to bring about long-term organizational survival' (1994, p. 33)i
The charm of Watson's book is that it does not just describe from a distanc~\
what managers do, it portrays a lived experience. It reveals how managers strug{
gle to make sense of what was happening around them and it reveals'.
management to be a search for meaning in a world of ambiguity. f~
One of the leading contemporary writers on management, Henry Mintzbergi;
studied chief executives in large and small organizations and groupi~
managerial roles into three sets: interpersonal roles (figurehead, lead%i
liaison); informational roles (monitor, disseminator, spokesman); decision,a~
roles (entrepreneur, disturbance handler, resource allocator, negotiatot);
(Mintzberg, 1979). These roles (see Illustration 6.1) highlight the ambiguity ·of
the relationship between management and leadership; leadership appears as ju~ij
one aspect of a top manager's job.

168
 Management and leadership

ntustration 6.1

Mintzberg's manageri~I roles

Figurehead . . . .. . . . . . . ·. . ·.:_: .
the figurehead rol~, the manager acts as the ·· · . _ · · • · . .· ·. : . . -,_ ._ · .·· • :..::.· ··.·•. · :·· ,.: · >:
In I are attending meetings on behalf of tli . re~re_s~ntatlve or symbc:il of the organlzat1on. Example~ _of 1f:lls
~;presentative of local business. · e org~n!Uition, meeting and greeting or ai:>_p .~t~.:8- ,!}mfr,~i~:.~ t\
-:~/:~· .;;/:,:;~f:~1i~-i:~. ~-:·~:~·:\-' ~--,:, .('-'.·,.:
:;;~~=~:;:~:~:~;~·
Leader - . . . :
is.co_ncerned with i~terpe~~~al -~ei~ti~ri~~;~~: ;~~:~~iiJat~~\h~;/ ~t~~- ~-~f
. . ..

: . _:
-:- .-. ; ...~-- ~ ~. '· .- .- . . ..:- -
h~r L;-_.: '·

. uaii~7s<>ri'.· ~1e·emph~~1ze~ the.n~ •_:_,.,:< ·: :. ·.. · ·.. ·... · · :- ·· · :_:·..,'.\ .... · i _.: _..·:
iheha . • -·· ·•·. •· · · · -· ,·.. -. ,. • . -~~~k~~ C?o_r:it~~~~ ~1~h othe~ in and outside the orgaf'!lzat19n.l;,1ii1slr:1g Vl~h . _.:
:;,,.'.:./:\;(::L:~_\.:-''.:_,'\~-/,":/.
. othe~ allows.manag~~-~o :conec_i_~nf()rrriati?n .an_ d ma¥ comeTti~u.gti'i~~oiv~ment
in pr;,feis~lori~ln.~t;;J~r~s:::.- i.
· Montt~r:·< :.. :: · · /-: \:· ;·::.·: .· :· ;:·</.-;\'\./';:::>: :_
>···.;-:::::-:-.,:_;:\::/)_:\/;_ \>.:_'. ·:_ .·~:{:_.:~ ·_: / :.: :.{:::_
\/}t{t_:_> :)-:-.
.· Monito~~~ t~~ e_nv,ro~me~t ~ . ~eep;)nf9~ecf~(ri~mp~tltors~ adtiviti~~; :i,e~' iegi';iatl~r( bh~rigei'l~-'tfiil\'.'.'.:., /.<,
0

. ..
.. As'sjx>k~~e~pn •..!J:!e ITl~ag_er ~iV!3~ lnfo0ta~.o~ 't',fothe~ ;butsi~:1:i' the\imariization':111~v'. sp~ak'bn beh~tt ¢)ti~':.''.; .

.·•.~l~~£t0f:° )·!:~sB~fj'.;rt~:;i:tf:~,'}'.hi";O:~f~~t:ff;;?;'.\f(\
~;.Toe rc.>ie .Pf e~tr~preneur is -~s_s,ocic!t~~ ,W!lh _1rn¢Y~.t19_n a~a:~h_angf -'~.11'!9,lµc!~s tie_9e'slgb ·at,d_!mpl~i'tj~ritatio~·~ '
. .of differen(types :of_chfulg'e;. from small-:scate·Job redesign.to largei-scale?organizationar rest~cturi~g'. };·' '"'--;; \ ..

: ::1S:i0fJJ:tt:tttft~1ff-~t.'.?f1,f!lt.tttJ}lWi}tl~f;}~tit~1'~£ill&cii'.
0

· The:111ari~gefin·1his _role a~ts'.t~ sc;>lve),r96~er,fi_ s!~at 'ifrl_5.e;_:C?flerrnf.i'~~Pi~l~iy.'Mapagi~g,t!S}~tifrv.eine__ir\ a_:·.". ~ :

- ·· · .. • ._ .. ._ .-., ..... • ... . .. ..-.• ., .. ... _., !~·· ··,·~· ·'~ · , • .. , ' .. ·•·· • ,., ...
~
. conflict 'situation or find a solution to 'a machine.br'eakdowr:i are:i:i'is~rnp!~~ pf:tijis role. /i/··:,:.·._;_ ·::)·'/;:''·· '.<::. :· ·, _:, . .
1.. .. . .-! .... •, •- 1•• - -:~,, . ·" ·;.J•~1- · • :.·•· •,· t •• _, ·!._ , . _, ., . •, . . 1 • •

·: .
1
R~~~~~~-~ ~;ij_
~;t!i/~:.: :.:; , \·;:::·t ': ~ -~-~~-•\tii})i{~~fa::/)Y:\:;:}t"}ii{i.'.it;.\~)1::t;~i."~i:;)f
otJna~agers controi :sorne:~1iic:1.ofre:~~ur¥ {e.g:·~p~ey~.:~a~?Li~ .~m.e) ~h~i -~~(~1:f~s§; '.~r:,-\:.:.·:.. ·t. :
:' fh~ ma,otity~
;f;:;i[~;{,\~?::_::;:,_~,·:·:.) _·:·••~
O. ~'~f1ij:1~~}~;~j\~~P,~.9(,?(}~!jfteff~9J~~ft:i.:'/::: •·:·, -~--·
:'~l!o~~t~t~t~~1f.'.~)s9_ret~~~-:aj_ipf~f~n~;rf\,9.Q~r~?:~C!~•r,~}_
·_··possibil~ies~are'tfi'e:s61iedullng of sub6tdinates'.:Wo_~k:ang.allo~ti.n~.~qu_1_pm~r:it .-:-....,_. ._:::2·:·:-t:>:=_;--.;:_/,,;a: :'. ' · . ·
.. ·-· .·:~-;:_.. :.: •.: , ·... ...... i ··: ... . '·: .. . :.-.·::..·,: ·-:· --·'·~ .' · . ·,:·.~-... _·:·:•·: .::: ;:.':·~; ·.,: . . ·· ·:·· · ..-r;·:_-. •.;~:=·:·~•.-::~-=· .: .~.;'" . . ' ·::- •
.
N ti. ·t', '· · .
ego aor . =,.
. : . :
-: ·: , .
.
. . · ·· ._ , _.. ..
' •. ... .
,. . .
: ,· .·: .
. ..... .. .. ...
.. , .....
•· ... ' ·
' , . .. ·. ..
· .,. _
·:_i .···:;\
-..
.."-.·· .. .
All rriaria~~-r~-..h~~~ _play th_ ~o
q1 _h.~~?,~!~tc;,~.
e role _ .~e.~~~e :~~~ ~i\l ~~·s<'i_ni~-~~-i~g~_'!Vhf:rJ,h~r
·. ~,i_~i~-?)~i_l\~~
t?
others. C~min~_ aweements on t~e-~"~Pr:.of7~e~P.JE! _ s J~~-~:~J9.~?,~Jr 1 ~-~r~~-e:~~~!r,~ ~t~~9.~J:~:\ 1~~- _-: , .

Sourt:e: Based ~n Ml~W:i~rg, H. (1979) The Nature of_Managerlal Work, Englewood._G'I~, NJ: Pre,ntlce H~l- .' -i . . . . • .: ..
• .
·::-:.
• - ~-......: . : ~_-. • ..~ · . .• ! , · : •.· · •· ; . · : . · ,:,· · ··' :_::.~:'.1. !·.·, . ·: : •'· ::~

169
~~
;228:c--•.
i<.¥.:.:,:,,<;.~
Ch t
ap er 6 Leadership and change

The differences between leading and managing (Kotter, 1990) are show _
Illustration 6.2 and highlight that managemen t is more about what go n 1n
· ·
within the formal structure of the orgamzation w h'l
1 e 1ea d ers h"1p focuse es 0 n
on interpersonal behaviour in a broader context. s tnore

• # . .,

(f111111i~11il\U!It1liltl)llti~i\i~{iJiiliiil
•. lllustra~ion _6.2 ·.:~

"::,~:~•!-Ci'eatlniJ
•• : ' :,_:.._t'.- ,".·~.}.1'.:~.'.': \
.:
·z!. -..:.· :-z.,i-an:·a en

:•
i~
~ ,:.::::;:.::;a:.~ *~?.±S;-::~;.:.;:~~,;;::~;;::,;:,:::¢;~:::2~ ~-~~
,~
~-;:
::,~
:..,..At
-~:.i
i~rJ
i
,-:is

~
_;J
'..~..-;:'.;;:-' ·····'· - ~---, ._••...:; use u .•c an e· e,g::illew:pro u , &1<

:11~,
:.: /'.//{f
rt~fWil1.l{j~fiiiYJlr~il
r,:'.
ilf,jjfillllJ
..:;_ chiiri ·•'e:'f:ia~'i.~iatrt;tijp_:rfii-ieiiini'/r:MJ~~e'merrftiy'JoKn •P..Ko«e'tcl '-•·1gtit@i4'sgo·6°·· Joh'n 'P.·~o3er·inlAJr';r 'tits'iesltrvedJ~
~•f::!>:;Jif;~:i / :f;:i,},-::);:.;:~:---:;i::fprn:!Yc\~ ;::;:;'::{:1I3ff:::;l:.?~f:t:GYJ:.:.: 'j_·: .-':',:.: ~::·: i .'X:'i~'E;l:~?~~ :·::\i: !.' f;;;

~1 ~ ~ Approac hes to leadersh ip theory

.....;.
Looking back over the past 100 years or so it is possible to see how leadershii?}
theory has steadily evolved. The earliest approach was to look for the trait 5:;
(innate qualities) of man (leaders were almost invariably men) that marked th~:•
good leader from the rest.

170
 Approaches to leadership theory
fhe 'one best way' to lead
rrait theory
rrait theory underpins the 1. d
d M ( ea that l d
(1948) an ann 19S9) came t th ea ers are born not made, yet Stodgill
sbipS between the traits possesse~ b e conclusion that there were few relation-
of some people being born to leaf ~~~ders and their performance. The notion
result, by the 1950s trait research f 1 not hold up under scrutiny and, as a
falling out of fashion, however tr .ell by the wayside (Zaccaro, 2007). Despite
appear t h at propose identifiabl' ait research c1·mgs on and studies continue to
. e sets of pe .
said to characterize successful 1 d rsona11ty and cognitive traits that are
ea ers Six t .t f
forward by Lord, De Vader and AU· · rai_ so successful leaders were put
ality, dominance, masculinit 9 6
iger (l ~ ); intelligence, an extrovert person-
non-leaders. Y, conservatism and being better adjusted than
A few years later, Kirkpatrick and L .
dies and suggested six d . ~eke
1ea ersh1p traits: (1991) surveyed existing leadership
stu
• drive (achievement, ambition energy t . . .. .
h· . . ' , enaaty, 1mtiative)
• leaders ip m~tivation (personalized or socialized)
• honesty and integrity
• self-~~nfide~_ce (inclu~i~g emotional stability)
• cogrutive ability (the ability to marshal and interpret a wide variety of information)
• knowledge of the business.
Kanter (1991, p. 54) claimed to have discovered the skills of change masters (by
which she means those successfully bringing about change) 'by researching
hundreds of managers across more than a half-dozen industries. I put change-
master skills in two categories: first, the personal or individual skills and second,
the interpersonal ones, how the person manages others.' She goes on to identify
what she calls 'kaleidoscope thinking' as well as the ability to communicate
visions, and be persistent. Coalition building and working through teams are
aspects of her second skills category.
Dulewicz and Herbert (1996) reported on managers who had been identified
as either 'high-flyers or low-flyers'. (Surely some subjective distinctions there!)
. High-flyers scored higher than the low-flyers on the f?l~owing and_also showed
exceptional managerial skills tn planning and organizing, managmg staff and
motivating others:
• risk-taking
• assertiveness and decisiveness
• achievement
• motivation
• competitiveness.

171
1~;;,.~,
~~ Chapter 6 Leadership and change

A study of the traits of chief executives in Sou th Korea (Shin, 1999), how
reveals a sobering contrast to the·trails typically proposed for·Ang/o•Ame ~•e,,
leaders shown above. In descending order they were: · · •· ncan·-..
nd
o Management respect for employees; caring for people a trying to deveio
~fil p
o Initiator attitudes; solving problems visibly in the workplace, showing lead
ship, 'mucking-in' to get things done. er.
o Tenacity and spirit; not wavering in the face of adversity.
o Network-building ability; relations with employees outside the organizar1 ..
such as government officials and financiers. ~
o Emphasis on competency; endless development of technology and people.

Top of the list we find leaders showing a refreshing interest in the peopl th
are leading in contrast to the far more ego-centred traits typically idenm:,d ey
US/UK studies. m.

172
r
~ I

Approaches to leadership th eor}' 'j

-

Leadership styles and behaviour

When trait research struggles to explain successful leaders, researchers began to
turn to studying the behaviour (t'he styles) that leaders use. Wright (1996,
p. 36) groups different leadership behaviours into four main leadership styles:
1 Concern for task. The extent to which the leader emphasizes high levels of pro-
ductivity, organizes and defines group activities in relation to the group's task
objectives and so on. (Also called concern for production, production-
centred, task-oriented and task-centred leadership.)
2 Concern for people. The extent to which the leader is concerned about their
subordinates as people - their needs, interests, problems, development, etc. -
rather than simply treating them as units of production. (1\lso called person-
centred, person-oriented and employee-centred leadership:)'
3 Directive leadership. The extent to which the leader makes all the decisions
concerning group activities themselves and expects subordinates simply to
follow instructions. (Also called authoritarian or autocratic leadership.)
4 Participative leadership. The extent to which the leader shares decision making
.
concermng grou
p ·activities with subordinates. (Also called democratic
leadership.)
. h' 'fl ti'on of leadership styles, it might be supposed that there are
G1ven t 1s c1ass1 ca ... -• th th th H
differences in th~ eff~cts of using one sty1e ra er an ano er. owever,

173
 d
~..
ntf~ Chapter 6 Leadership an change
~~ . attem ting to link leadership style Wit ;!
st udies . & ti~ n foun d littl e evidence of diff ~-:
Wright's review of a range of rdin ate sat1s1ac dO as the mos t app ropr iate i ep ··_,:
· performance an d su bO n au~
high ne style eme rge .~i
t·ve leadership style was related to~:
ences. Consequent IY,& no·nstance a parttcipa
O • • 1
· · d h t ·twa s not clear whe th ,/:
situations an w ere, 10r th;,1
1 ' .
a es, :rha s hi h satisfacti er
high performance and satisfaction of su~ordm p g on Waf~
.p
leader's style was the causal variable or :vice versa .•;,,
a causal factor in enabling a participative
style.

__
The Michigan and Ohio studies 5
two famous tt1ct,~.~s of leadersh~~}
Given the above it is interesting to note that
n resp e~v ely ~st~~ U~v ersi ~·qrJ.
(Stodgill and Co;ns, 1957; Likert, i961), know
rately iden ti?e d .~o mde pe~ ,
Michigan studies and the Ohio State studie_s, sepa
nce, a com bma tton of the fotir'j
ent dimensions of leadership which were, m esse
researchers nam ed these 'consi~l~
types of behaviour described earlier. Toe Ohio
~11
eration' and 'initiating structure'. ds trus t and mut ual respei:J;
Consideration is the degree to which a leader buil
s and con cern for their weli~
with subordinates, shows respect for thei r idea
hum an relations approach 1q1
being. This dimension is linked to a participative,
for peo ple' and 'par ticip afit~
leadership. It therefore combines the 'con cern
-~
leadership' styles identified by Wright. struc ture s th~
Initiating stmcture is the degree to which a lead
er defines and ·- ~
ards the atta inm ent of foi:m~;
role and the interactions within the ·group tow
ership' and 'con cern for taslcs·'~~
goals. It has elements of both the 'directive lead \l~
styles described above.
loye e-ce nter ed' and 'produ~t~
The Michigan researchers used the terms 'emp
but they were virtually the sarri!1
tion-centered' leadership for these dimensions
abo ut thes e dim ensi ons is th~
as the Ohi o descriptions. The mai n poin t
each other, a leader's behaviori~
because they are deemed to be independent of :,tf.J.i
ers can be:
can be categorized in four different ways. Lead
o high on consideration and high on initi
ating structure
o high on consideration and low on initi
ating structure
o low on consideration and low on initi
ating structure
o low on consideration and high on
initiating structure.

The Leadership Grid®

i-~
Building on the Oh·~o and M'ich1•gan studies Blake and Mou ton (1964) propos~~~1
that th t "
.
ip styl 15 . . "cJ.
e mos euective leadersh
. e one whi ch 1s high on both person ~ 'i"·~
·ob dimensi·ons p· ( ~
J · igure 6 1 gives the poSi'ti,ons of five different leadership sty~~
on a later version of Bl~ke and
'Leadership Grid®' (Bl k Mou ton s man ager ial grid - now called cl!~
g1f
, 1991). The diff eren t combinationIts iiil
concern for people anad e and Mccanse
concern for product"ion· set out in Figure 6.1 resu \ >'~
different combinations of 1 d h'ip characteristics as follows.
ea ers

l 7-+
 46; -.
The 9,1 Authority C Approaches to leadership theory ~~ .
- 0 rnp1·
concern for people em zance leader h
expense of the ne~ds ~hasi2ing effici/s a high concern for the task and little
0
achieved if people ar People. 'fher ~cy and the organization's needs at the
1 1
McCanse (1991, p. s:/,osely supel'Vis~ : a belief that production can only be
·nvolvement or · A Grid style l'k nd controlled. According to Blake and
1 , commitrn 1 e91• . .
The 1, 9 Country Club ent of th ose Who' is unlikely to elicit the cooperation,
1eadership styl ,
. ·ty will foll . . are expected to complete the task.
tiVI ow If the needs of e 18 based on the assumption that produc-
people cannot be pressured int ~e?ple are satisfied. These leaders believe that
O
get them to perform Well A • oing things - they need to be well treated to
. 1 . ccording t0 Bl
ersh1p sty e, although encou . ake and Mccanse however this lead-
ragmg fri , ,
results where productivity s ff endly and pleasant relationships, produces
, u ers Cre r1 ·
because of the possible conn· · a v1ty and innovation are undermine d
. . ict that · h
existing ways of doing things. mig t surface as a result of challenges to

High , ... .

i ~~~~(~~~~~;:g:Si ii
9 1

a '··:.-.Th..o.
~g~lful a~entl.on·.tci'the:n
1
):
•. - : •,-' :'· .-.·, ,; .•,• .. . ,. •~,:::.. ·.::·.'.·1: . . . ,'?, :3~9_01~:m,
. of. peo~J~.~~r.
·:_>/Ji~~~~;iii·g~
:·fie,.·!Js,1-·· ,.:• -. • • ,., · . w. rk·..•....... ,,. .. ,. -':11'"'h··.:•·, ..,,,t·:1:s,.f·ro
~a~(~fr!"Q ,:elc!tlonshlps -·::~ :_; •J •:·, comrriitted ~e>ple; il)tei'dependence: ~.rne~ ·-·· .·
"•'·m
·
·.~!. '. · ·• ;.

~ l~a~~ ~~ ,~,c;:.o~t~~~blf ~rien'~ly :\: ' ,'./.:, ' ..':. ,:·thrciu9.h '-if'.cofiirnqn, ~~ke J~_>. :..-:--
7 . orgam~tl.~n ~tf!!osphe.re ~ry~·.~ '.. ·.:. ' . , ·org·anlzation·pµrp9~_ ~.Jef~~~:~o: ..
·. wor~ tempo: : '. '.-: .:.:'.. · : ..: . ::-:-- :· ·j · :· ·-: -. , :::relatiorisRips of.trusfar,'.d respect .

CII 6
a.
0
Cll
...CL
.e 5
E
G>
u
C
0
0 4

, .. .8<~rtfori 'o f minimum effort :. . 9,.. ,.,:::· ·,: -:~· ·':.,';- .: ·. ··~rrariging'conditlons .'of.work ·In .:.. :._,_-·
2
?· •,eq'ulrea:0.~JK~:?fi·1i~~if~~»i~f¥ '.'1~1f?t:'.'. ;,; \~~k'f~~§.~t~~m~~;~l~.~i~!~:·,_
~
,...:- · • , • -~!ii-norganizatlon : ... :- '·i,'.,1..:;·f '· .- .. ,;·}!.•:~' ,,: . '····1nteiiera'to a•rilinimum'aegree; .-·,.. : · ,

Low1 : :

1
~~!~)ilI!\'f!;:~~itl~!fj!\~:: ~lljftS~i:fHi~tirni't~~i~1~tCh
2
1

3 Concern for production g

Low

hip Grid® . Grid Solutions, Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing,

Figure 6.1 The Leaders ) Leadership DIiemmas. M uton Austin, Texas. Used with permission.
199 1
d McCanse, A.A. ( d the Estate of Jane SM. t~ods i'nc. and Is used here with permission.
Source: Blake, R. an Robert R. Blake an ertY of scientific e
91
p, 29. Copyright © 19 ~y® designation is the prop
All rights reserved. Toe Gri d

175
 The 1,1 Impoverished Management or lais_sez-faire leadership style is charactenzect
by minimum concern for both productwn and the needs of people. The 1
leader's desire is to remain as uninvolved as possible with ot~er_ people, compa~~
ble with fulfilling the requirements of the job and. sustammg
. l organizati on
membership. Conflict is deliberately avoided by remammg neutra on most con.
tentious issues.
The 5,5 Middle of the Road leadership style is concerned with moderate rather
than high performance. This results from a desire to balance the contradictio
between production and people's needs through com~rom_ising in the face 0~
conflict. It includes a willingness to yield on some pomts
. . . m •.•order to gain 0n
others. This is a team-oriented style, but because negativity 1s not tq_lerated com.
placency can set in and the team can lose sight of reality. -
The 9,9 style of Team Management incorporates high concern for production
with a high concern for people. In contrast to the 5,5 leadership style, Which
assumes an inherent contradiction between production and people, the 919
leadership style assumes that concern for both is necessary and that the two •
concerns do not contradict each other. There is an emphasis on working as a
team that recognizes the interdependence of people with each other, together
with the task to be done. Relationships between people are based on mutual·
trust and respect, and wor~ is assumed to be accomplished only if employees are
committed to the task, team and organization.

176

d
 Approaches to leadership th eol'Y

The Leadership Grid® assume5 th

9 'Ji M at there is one best style of leadership, namely
9, earn .. ana~ement' style - regardless of the situation. It is a simplified way
of _categor~mg different aspects of leadership behaviour. Other studies of leader-
ship beh~viour
th have generated longer lists such as Useem (1996) who suggested
challengi~?
st e pr~c~ss, searching for opportunities, experimenting, inspiring a
shared vi ?n, envmoning a future, enlisting others, enabling others to act,
strengthemng ot?ers, fostering collaboration, modelling the way, setting an
example, _c~lebrating accomplishments and recognizing contributions.
ln addition, Useem, drawmg on a study of 48 firms among the Fortune 500
largest US manufacturers, gives the following behaviour as characterizing the
most successful chief executive officers:
• being visionary;
• showing strong confidence in self and others;
• communicating high-performance expectations and standards;
• personally exemplifying the firm's Vision, values and standards;
• demonstrating personal sacrifice, determination, persistence and courage.

Visionary leadership
:. These five characteristics ~re not unlike 'charismatic-visionary' leadership
(Robbins and Coulter, 2005, pp. 433-436). This focuses on the personality of the
leader and the influence they have to get others to behave in certain ways. They
suggest that this form of leadership offers clear and compelling imagery that
taps into people's emotions and inspires enthusiasm to pursue the organiza-
tion's goals. Charismatic-visionary leaders exhibit the following characteristics:
• the ability to explain the vision to others; .
• the ability to express the vision, not just verbally, but through behav10ur and
symbols that reinforce the vision; . .
• t he ab1hty
• . to exten d or apply the vision to different leadership contexts.

177
r
~61
~"'lrt'"' Chapter 6 -Leadership and change

Contingency approaches to leadership

Although trait_a.~c! s_t:Y,!~.!!!.t:.9!1~~--qfJ!:,~.Q~JSh.~P h11ve som.e SUpport
d there are
many things that can influence a leader's effectiveness ~ver ail above a leaderis •
th
ualities and behaviour. Researchers began to appreciate . t· at effective
h lead er
q h
behaviour cannot be separated entirely · from
f · t e Situa
ti. ion
t t at the leader
is working with. Effective behaviour there ore is con ngen upon situational
variables (see Figure 6.2).
-~-1

Behaviour along a continuum

One of the best-known theories· that takes situational facto,~s iHto account I
(Tannenbaum and Schmidt, 1973) arranges Ieader_ship behaviour along·a conti J
uum not unlike the 'directive' and 'participative' leadership styles discus,,'.k4
previously. One end of the continuum represents 'boss-centred leadershi , •
which assumes a high level of authoritarian leader power and that leaders Ji:
subordinates what to do. At the other end, 'subordinate-cen!red leadership' ;)
leaders and subordinates jointly make decisions in a participative climate. ·.':;j
Tannenbaum and Schmidt suggest that a leader should move along the con~-~
tinuum, selecting the style that is most appropriate to the situation prevailingl
They identify 'forces' that determine the style of leadership to use. · ~:•

CUSTOMERS

COMPETITION

Figure 6.2 Situational influences on leadersh·1P effectiveness

.

178
 ~a,}:'~~

hip theo '' ~"'i:%,r

n/ @ifAi
· 5 '1°
Approaches to lead ers '-'Ci:-~• ,.

• Forces .in the manager. Each . f per-

sonality characte • manager will have their own combination °
predisposes the adr1st~cs, skills and knowledge values and attitudes tbat
option of ' tb r
• Forces in the subord' one particular style of leadership or ano e · th
degree of suppo t mate. Subordinates vary in their characteristics such th as e
commitment tor needed, their experience in and knowledge of • wor~j
behave and _organizational goals expectations as to hoW leaders Wl
, previous exp • ' th
• Forces in the situ ti enence of different leadership styles.
task or probl a_ on. These divide into two categories; first, the nature of e
em itself and d . h ' h the leader-
ship act· •ty , secon , the general context in w 1c
proble~~theta~es plac~. This can include the immediacy and severity of th•
d time available to make a decision th• organizational culture nd
an power balances between the different parti~ipants in the situation a
st
general opportun'ti1 es and constraints arising from organizational ru ctu res
and processes as well as environmental and societal influences.
th
When changes in the organizational environment are sudden and severe en
a ~-ore autho_rita_tive leadership style may be called for. In other cases, the pre-
vaihng org'.""zational structure and rulture may force a more participative style
of leadership. Illustration 6.3 is an example of the application of these concepts
to leadership in a situation facing the Beautiful Buildings Company in one of its
ventures to build luxury apartments in Japan.

~l~i~®f§i~f*i~~~i;:~i}2i;/.l:;:ic<i'iiii.tl~r;2\tiIJ\;:;av{}J;~~i::\.
'

~~~~&l"'tif ~'W~lltl~fil''ffi~~ifs'Mn~aii"~~l'.sf/;la~"¾'Jrli~:li'f t~t'cbii-<f';,"/'i .

\ -~,'1" )11 .,. ~-... •!<·-·1,···· P., ·.•.' Y.'.;l<t ~r-,-;.
worl<ing ;n'th1§:&oun1•· 1,utfiiO,sent:som,;11me· lalkil'\Q.,o_·:.,; "
'l.~·-i~~~;ti,,;;/
·, ,,lo'..:• ..: ;. -:: ~§J,.,, ,•..,,.,::.-.,;:.
;~--:: n ~,-1{ :•,"(; t '• j.'•.:;-,-.li, J~ J.:Jtt?...,. •.~,,...:.. •,,, .. ,, •..., , ,, "''"' o'J,:,, .•. T.'f.'(,"'l!:,-:;~-~ ....... ,... •·..,
•.,,.,a;ITTJapaiEstiei;.0:1rro7rea:elqleiffnct!"Of
1
, JR,6il<ilt1tn'ifid"6WJtira"illZO~s1~'.~~'iilitiii;Wltfil' ~cii,' l!ie'i~,,~efi~'lli~'e\'ii'~b''iiafi:;/,'\lli(il

-~.i•.•· ·,,. c··c . Subordinates ..preferences " .. - •••••• , ... . .... . , • ••• · ••• ••,. • ••• ····•.• I"· ·,1 <·t._ , W · .. ,.•. , · ;r'' I ' .• ,, ., " ., ,··"·· •,• ( > -· • • · "

··,·Toe-1~ii"''r°r";;- ·1iied1agr.mfail19a\eitieaegreeso(tiee<10m •~a11a~1e·1o·payrie:Jrt _iiiesitii~ii&I'";'.' •

·· ·
·facing he~t: ~,;fi[J1:1i1~ hOr oWri leiideriih1P styiB shOWS her prefi,~ric~ ~JelM~in~
. . · r ·..} •/:· • ·,· . .- , •, .
''?i'!i-1.ft~?-
,,, ,' .~ : ·:·., '-·~;.',:.: ··'. ·•:;'.; ~,:,:.::,,.:;.:.•> . .. I>
. . ,• . . .. ·,:.-. · :.'.':·,·· ·:··., ...

179
180
r Approaches to leadership th eory
.,~
1{289=:
~~dfl

Hersey and Blanchard's situational theory

Another difficulty with contingency theories is the question of how much
importance should be attached to each contingency factor. Clearly the task and
the amount of power held by the leader are important, but it seems logical that
the characteristics and expectations of group members or subordinates are more
important in deciding what style of leadership to adopt - after all, it is they who
must carry out the task.
This is the point of Hersey and Blanchard's (1993) situational leadership
theory which puts greatest _stress on one major situational factor - the readiness
· of the followers. According to this theory, a leader's behaviour should depend
on the maturity and readiness of followers to accept responsibility and make
their own decisions. Task and relationship behavior again feature such that a
leader could be low on both task and relationship behaviour, high on both or
high on one and Iow·on another. As a result a leader's behaviour falls into one
of four quadrants - from 'telling1 through 'selling' and 'participating' to 'delegat-
ing'. The readiness of followers also falls into four categories, each of which, in
an ideai world, should trigger one of the four types of leadership behaviour.
Gordon (1999, pp. 234-236) refers to this theory as a 'life-cycle' model of
leadership, presumably because the followers move from being both unable and

181
'
I
~!.:,_ii.0_~}1' Chapter 6 Leadership and change
, ~~,;r;;

unwilling (or too insecure) to take on responsibility for their own actions, t
being either unable but willing (or confident) or willing but unable, to the high~
est state of readiness where they are both able and willing to fake responsibility .
for decisions and actions.
Figure 6.3 shows how a leader's behaviour should change according to th .
quadrant into which the followers' readiness falls and is similar to the fou~ .
quadrants of the Leadership Grid® (Blake and McCanse, 1991). This is not,
surprising given the two leadership styles and the combinations available.·!

STYLE OF LEADER

:c-o
C.
C.
::I

...
.!!?.

-~i;
::I

.c
GJ
.c
C.
EII)
C
0
;:
m
'ii
a:

Low

rls
Low Task behaviour (guidance) High
1

a great quite

-fyl
deal a bit some little
4 3 2 1 able pecson
(has the• a
:i
necessary
JOB READINESS knowledge and'.

r~pe-•)
I skilij

I
·,:<,,
on
usually often occasion seldom
willing (has th~i
4 3 2 1
Willingness I necessary
confidence an~
;J
PSYCHOLOGICAL READINESS
commitment) ::·
I I I
FOLLOWER(S) READINESS ·

Figure 6.3 Hersey and Blanchard's theory of situational leadership :--::~r

Source: Hersey, P. and ~lanchard, K.H. (1993) Management of Organizational Behavior: UJ}lizing Human Resourct!§i
(6th edn), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, p. 197. ,•;,._
,

182
 Approaches to leadership theory t
However, while Blake and M
occasions (the 9 9 cCanse argu f ,
. ' way), Hersey and e or a one best way' of leading for all
be contingent upon the characte . ~lanchard argue that a leader's style should
contrast to Fiedler, for instance bnstics and attitudes of those who are led. In
th
enough to change accordin ' o th eones assume a leader's style is flexible
th
Blanchard's case, that it ca g to e prevailing situation and in Hersey and
d h n presumabI h ,
groups an as t e followers 'matur , Y c ange in the presence of different
thr
e ough the cyde (Gordon, 1999).
Path-goal theory of leadership
Originally developed by Ho
use (1971) th
leader should use the style of 1 : pa -goal theory maintains that the
subordinates' perceptions of t;adership that is most effective in influencing
path) in which they should b e ~oals they need to achieve and the way (or
relates directly to expect e achie~ed (Woffard and Liska, 1993). The theory
th
judged successful if th ancy eones of motivation in that a leader will be
effective leadership Wi;{
hc~n help s~borctinates reach their goals. In other words
e P subordmates
leveI p erformance. Four leader b h · tum effort into appropriate and high-
e aviours are suggested by path-goal theory:
• Directive behaviour - laving ct •
. ;• own standards, tellmg. what to do and how to

• Supportive behaviour - showing concern fo.r followers in an open and

approachable manner.
• Partidpative behaviour - inViting opinions and ideas from followers.
• Achievement-oriented behaviour - setting challenging objectives that stress
improvements over what was once acceptable and showing confidence that
followers can achieve.

Two dominant situational factors are relevant to this theory. These are the char-
acteristics of followers and the nature of the task or job and the immediate
context in which it takes place. The challenge to the leader is to use a style that
is congruent with the skills, motivation and expectations of followers and With
the goals to be achieved, the design of the jobs and the resources and time avail-
able. Figure 6.4 shows the factors that are presumed to intervene between the
effort put into doing a job and the s~bsequent perfo1;11ance._ . .
The subordinate characteristic of locus of control (see Figure 6.4) 1s of mter-
'· est as it has not appeared in the other leadership theories considered so far. It
recognizes that people have preferences for the w~y th~y are managed and this
· locus of control, that is, their
· 1'nfluence d b y th eir
1s . beliefs about who and what
controls their lives. Smith (1991, p. 220) descnbes the concept of locus of con-
trol as follows:
· s a person's beliefs about who controls their life.
The locus of control concern f control believe that they control their own lives.
O
People with an internal locus f trol believe other people control their lives
. t al locus o con .
People with an ex em f leadership non-directive styles of leadership
th 0
According to path-goal eo~y d a directive style should be used With externals.
should be used with 'internals ar;s like to be told.
Internals like to be asked, extema

!83
l
rit~'i
,.~:.,};.'.•:.-•,'
Chapter 6 Leadership and change

CHARACTERISTICS OF TEAM MEMBERS

Expectations
Skill Motivation Locus of control (e.g. that effort
will bring desired

EFFORT
! ...... J ! ·=
rewards)

*t PERFOR~N~

1
Job design
t
Goal clarity
t
Resources Time
(e.g. simple (e.g. tools, materials,
or complex) Information, etc.)

NATURE OF TASK AND ITS CONTEXT

Figure 6.4 Factors intervening between effort and performance

Toe four leadership behaviours are used, as needed, to fit the context. If followerj
lack confidence then supportive behaviour is called for. If the nature of the wor~
is vague then directive leadership is needed to clarify a way forward. If work
seen as not challenging enough then achievement-oriented behaviour can b1
used to raise the goals for followers. If reward strategies are poor then particip~j
tive leadership can help clarify what followers are seeking and change hmf
rewards are distributed.
·:1
Matching organizational models and leadership roles :,
An organization's strategic focus together with preferred forms of control wm'.
determine many situational variables and influence the particular leadershlp.'
style employed. Two different pieces of research pick up on these ideas to sug{
gest links between different organizational models and different approaches tg
leadership. Quinn (1988) proposed four organizational models distinguished q_g
the basis of two bipolar dimensions (see Table 6.2). These are: /:l
~)!
(a) adaptability and flexibility versus the desire for stability and control; \0
(b) whether organizations are outward looking (towards the environment aii1!)
·..~t.:
the competition) or internally focused towards the maintenance of systeIJJ{;
and procedures. ·<1l
J;J
Table 6.2 summarizes the different characteristics of the four organizatio~~
models that result from combining these four different organizational orientaticl1/0
(see also Figure 6.5). Quinn uses the terms 'the hierarchy', 'the firm', 'the adh~~
racy' and 'the team' as a shorthand way of describing the internal process, ration~
goal, open systems and human relations organizational models respectively. · · ·

18~
 ;-,,:,'!'/'.;.~:;;
· theory ¥.2@~
Approaches to leadership

fable 6.2 Summary of Quinn's four organizational models

What is interesting about the framework in Figure 6.5 is Quinn's linking of dif-
ferent dimensional positions with leadership style and the roles leaders
should play. Different leadership styles and behaviour 'fit' different organiza-
tional models.
Farkas and Wetlaufer (1996) came to similar conclusions to Quinn about the
dependence of leadership style and behaviour on the needs of the organization
and the business situation at hand. On the basis of interviews with 160 chief
executives they found five distinctive approaches to leadership, each of which
was associated with different emphases in terms of strategic planning, research
and development (R&D), recruitment and selection practices, matters internal to
the organization or matters external to it and with whom, and how, they spent
their time. According to Farkas and Wetlaufer (p. 111) the leadership approach
to be adopted depends on answering questions such as: 'Is the industry growing
e~plosively or is it mature?. How many competitors exist and how strong are
they? Does technology matter and, if so, where is it going? What are the organi-
zation's capital and human assets? What constitutes sustainable competitive
advantage and how close is the organization to achieving it?' To these questions
one could also add: 'What kind of changes is the organization facing and what
do these mean for the role of leadership?'

Problems with contingency theory

Although it ~as widely researched, over time it became clear that contingency
theory has some serious limitations (Pa~ and Bryman, 2006). These are:

185
f.2$t.;)
il~~1i.:;i.,
Chapter 6 Leadership arid change

OPEN SYSTEMS MODEL

HUMAN RELATIONS MODEL

Innovator role
Mentor role Creative, clever
Caring, empathetic (envisions change)
(shows consideration)
Brokerrofe
Group facilitator role Resource oriented,
Process oriented politically astut~.. · .
(facilitates Interaction) (acquires resource~] .-.

Producer rote
Monitor role
Task oriented,
Technically expert
work focused
(collects information)
Qnitlates action)

Coordinator role Director role

Dependable, reliable Decisive, directive
(maintains structure) (provides structure)

RATIONAL GOAL MODEC1

INTERNAL PROCESS MODEL
·:l
',?.-;

Figure 6.5 Competing values framework of leadership roles ,'-{I~

~J
Sourc~: Quinn, R.E. (1988) Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of High Performance,__
Francisco: Jessey-Bass, p. 86. -;;:~~
:0~
o There are just too many contingent variables that the theory has to acco~~
:j
o Studies struggled to justify why some situational variables should be includ~~
and others excluded; '1k1
o Leader behaviour was not always situationally contingent; j~
o Most research was ~oss-sec~ional which means that it is impossible to
rate cause (leadership behaviour) from effect (performance): ~:\1
The contribution of contingency theory is the message that there is not one,~~~
way of leading ~egardless of situation. From the 1980s onwards interest rno,y,iJ
away from contingency models towards fresh explanations and a key concept,}ffl
what Parry and Bryman call the 'New Leadership Approach' is charisma.

186
 Approaches to leadership th eory
~li
~,S

New leadership theories

Charismatic leadership
The ~dea of charisma and charismatic leaders is prominent in leadership th eory
and its links to change. But what is charisma? The concept is not new and ongi-
· ·
nated With Max Weber who contrasted charisma with bureaucratic sySt erns of
control. Charisma is about people leading not by virtue of sets of rules and proce-
d~re~ but through creating a following for their mission. Charisma comes from
within - its sets its own boundaries. Weber's original ideas illustrate it beautifully:
The continued existence of charismatic authority is, by its very nature, characteris~-
cally unstable; the bearer may lose his charisma ... and show himself to his
followers as 'bereft of his power', and then his mission is dead, and his followers
must hopefully await and search out a new charismatic leader. He himself, however,
is abandoned by his following, for pure charisma recognises no 'legitimacy' other
than that conferred by personal power, which must be constantly re-confirmed. The
charismatic hero does not derive his authority from ordinances and statutes, as if it
were an official 'competence', nor from customary usage or feudal fealty, as with
patrimonial power: rather, he acquires it and retains it only by proving his powers
in real life. He must perform mirades if he wants to be a prophet, acts of heroism if
he wants to be a leader in war. Above all, however, his divine mission must 'prove'
itself in that those who entrust themselves to him must prosper. If they do not,
then he is obviously not the master sent by the Gods.
(Rundman and Matthews, 1978, p. 229)
Failure is to charisma as Kryptonite is to Superman. Failure shows the charismatic
leader's mortality and punctures.their superhero image. Weber described the
charismatic figure as one who will blame themselves when missions fail. If things
still do not improve then, as history shows, some leaders have chosen banish-
ment or even death. Recognition ·of the personal mission by followers relies upon
their submission, through their faith, to the leader's extraordinariness and their
desire to abandon past rules and traditions. Belief in charismatic power revolu-
tionizes people and channels their energies into shaping organizations. Charisma
changes the hearts of those it rules. In time, however, bureaucracy follows it and
replaces charisma with rules which are followed as if sacred. Even charisma
becomes institutionalized eventually. High charisma rejects the sacred practices
(or at least many of them) .. Charisma is mission incarnate.
Although we can describe what a charismatic leader does we have a weaker
understanding of the processes and interactions between leaders and followers
and which lead to social change. Research on US presidents suggests that charis-
matic leaders uses 'consistent common strategies for breaking down, moving
and re-aligning the norms of their followers'. (Fiol, Harris and House, 1999, p.
450). Fiol and colleagues see change as being about changing values; champi-
oning and prioritizing one thing over and above another. It is the 'contrary of
conventions' (p. 458) such that the more conventional a leader is the less charis-
matic they will appear. They use Lewin's three stage model to show how values
can be changed, as shown in Illustration 6.4.

187
~,t,·t..'...,::.,
f246J Chapter 6 Leadership and change
$i;i;-;;,;-;_!T

r i'i1ustrati~~ f4ll

:,<{
Charismatic authority is bolstered by four additional dimensions that facilit~~f;
change (Conger, 1993, p. 279). First, charisma, being a personal characteri~1.fJ1
bestows on those who posses it a source of power and influence quite differ~&
to position power. Second, charismatic leadership glorifies the leader fi~fj
and their qualities and breaks with traditions. Challenges to existing soc~:~~
order occur since the leader's heroic attributes are championed above histo~~
and traditional ways of doing. Third, charismatic leadership is short nve~

188
 . ,re
compared to ratt Approaches to leadership theory ijll • ·
onaI-Ie a · . ···
as long as a charism t· g 1 authority
a 1c lead · 1n an o
the ch anges they set 1. er figure . rganizatlonal setting it exists for
a revolutionary force ~ Play become e::_bpresent but after they ha~e departed
, its pu ...u edded ·
order to the next It lpose is to b . in rational-legal structures. 'As
· s rol · · ridge th
accomplishing this t k e is to create . e transition from one existing
nd
institutions grow as ' charisma fad a . lilS t itutionalize new order. After
replace the charis~p ~o stabilize and ~:d:r is routtnize_d. Rules, traditions and
ment of follo atic leader Who has d the new social arrangements and to
leader fi wers to change is a con eparted' (p. 279). Fourth, the commit-
gure and not through alle .sequence of their emotional ties with the
represent the 'organization' giance to a set of rules and structures that
While we may look at th.
. o ers and think th
an important question about h ey have a certain charisma, there is
·
Are c h ansmatic · people cha . ow. much context and charisma are interrelated.
. nsmatic whe .
text brmg out their charismatic . r_ever they find themselves or does con-
moment in time, a group of em qualities? Conger (1993) observes that at a
situations. If these concerns p!oyees (followers) ·have concerns for their work
that resonate with these are s ared and if an individual says and does things
concerns in a ··
with 'followers' attributi f . positive way then they can be bestowed
We can also speculate that rt .
°
on chansma to leaders' (p 285)
. . · ·
·ct .. ce am orgamzational conditions and climate will
provi e opportunities for would b h . . •
. - e c ansmatic leaders to display their vision
and their ways of changing Th h
· en t ere are further questions about what the
psychological ingredients are that are necessary if charisma is to be tapped by
contexts and displayed. Conversely, are some people doomed to be uncharis-
matic if they lack these ingredients? ·
Landrum, Howell and Paris (2000) potnt out that. while many writers claim
that 'strong' charismatic leadership is required for strategic and 'turnaround'
change, there is also a 'dark side' to charismatic leaders. They comment that
charismatic leaders can lead followers in directions unhelpful to society and
organizations. They also point out a possible propensity for narcissism and
quote Post (1986, p. 679) who states that the charismatic leader: 'Requires a con-
tinuing flow of admiration from his audie~ce_in ~rd~r to -~ourish his famished
self. Central to his ability to elicit that admuation 1s his ability to convey a sense
-~:of gra~deur, omnipotence, and strength.' Land~m et ~l. (2000) refer to une~ical
• • d who are controlling, mampulat1ve and self-promoting -
chansmatic 1ea ers
. . h ·eopardize and even sabotage the turnaround efforts of
charactenst1cs t at can J • • •
. . miti ate these possibilities and overcome the difficulties of
the orgamzat1on. To g d s·tuations Landrum et al. argue for a
11 h.10 to all peop1e an I ,
leaders being a t ~~ . nd implementing strategic change (see below on
team approach to desigmng a
team and distributeq leadership).

)89
~1ta't~Chapter 6
l~jii~,c.•,:,
Leadership and change
.:~_;.;;,l"

Emotional intelligence 93) who d eveloped the concept, 'Emotional --.,..

According to Goleman (1998, fP·1 dersh1p ' . , [au thor's italics]. On the basis of. .·.,an·
intelligence is the sine qua non° ea . 188 mostly large global compam~~,;
examination of competency models m capabilities that drive outstanding;.
found the persona1 · 1 t h · ·.,.,
Goleman claims to h ave .. , . to three categones: pure Y ec meat
the capabil1t1es in . I. ::•
performance. He grouped . demonstrating emot1ona mtelli~1
Tt' and competencies . ····
skills, cognitive ab1 i ies . the five components of:
gence (EI), which he defines as having

o self-awareness;
o self-regulation;
o motivation;
o empathy;
o social skills. t have technical skills (such·-.1it1 ... A,

While not decrying the need• for lea d O

. h as ana1ytical:l
d ers
gn·ttve
1 capabilities (sue
accounting and business planning) an co . h .1 b .
n~g;j
.;,t}-::.1
reasoning) he claims these are 'threshold capabilities', that is, w I e e1~g.
· t fficient without the add1tion'ofJ
sary for successful leadership they are no su . z • . • • :·-:;.~
emotional intelligence. Cote and Miners (2006) describe e~otional ~te~hg:~:
10
f::i!
as seeing your own emotions and those of others and usmg these ''.ghts, I
lead. Bar-On (1997, p. 14, cited in Dries and Pepermans, ~007) descnbed rt ~ :'•~
array of non cognitive capabilities, competences and skills that mfluen~e -~~?.:-:~
ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands a~d press_ur~s .
and Dulewicz (2004, p. 175) suggested that EI is concerned With ach1evmg OJ!~t~
goals through the capabilities to:
1 manage one's own feelings and emotions;
2 be sensitive to the needs of others and influence key people; and ·A""~
3 balance one's own motives and drives with conscientious and eth{~t;f
behaviour. :.:·:~~~
-:_~/
Since different leadership roles have different emotional demands it follows 't#.fj
jobs with high emotional content should be performed better by leaders WiJ.-~
high emotional intelligence. Martin (2008) found a moderately strong ·t!P-J
between EI and job performance but other studies have produced more mlg~p~
results (see Cote, S. and Miners, ?006). To explain the mixed findings, Co~~;; '
and Miners proposed that the relationship between EI and job perform~-~·;;
increases as cognitive i~t~Iligence decreases. Cognitive intelligence is usvl .:?. ·'.
related to performance m Jobs (the smarter the person, the better the perl,8.- ..
ance? because smarter people have a better grasp of information and proce4i¾~,'
relating to the core technical. ~ork. Emotional intelligence may therefor(~t~
compensator for lo~er_cogm~r~re (general) intelligence. Their propositi?.~JJ.I
supported for orgamzat1~nal c1t1:enship behaviour (doing positive things~~
and above what the core Job reqmres) and task performance. · -

190
 However do th
, e com Approaches to leadership theory -ii:J.[~
"'.1, ... ;'P
0
what we already kn P nents of en-. . . ·
. ow about •uOtional . t 11·
victuals? Woodruffe the psycho} . m e 1gence add anything new to
2
intelligence adds an \~OO) thinks not ~nd social characteristics of indi-
and competencies ytf ng new to What . re1ects the claim that emotional
ever is that EI h
o 1eacters and othe 1s,ATL already k
nown about the behaviour
.
, as popul . rs. n uat W
in the service of b . . arized the need f oodruffe does concede, how-
and the tasks the nng~ng greater effectiv;r leaders to_ exhibit these capabilities
Y are involved in All ness to their management of people
managers and lead · this ma b . .
ers at all levels . Y e no bad thmg 1f it encourages
to use what Beer and Nohria (20~n organizations to pay attention to the need
leading organizational cha nge. O) can 'soft' as well as 'hard' approaches to
Severa1 models of emot'
. . iona1 intellig .
quest10nnaue approach Th ence exist and each is assessed through a
· e concept h
sultants but a more mix·ed . as attracted a good following from con-
reactton from d •
(Murphy, 2006). aca em1cs - some like it; others do not

Transactional and transforimat,·o 11 d .

na ea ersh1p
Organizations responding t 0 th . .
e t1ghtenmg market conditions that started in
the late 1970s often attem t db'
P e 1g changes - changes that transformed struc-
tures and markets. We began to see 'hero' leaders emerge who were credited
with transformational changes; transformational leaders in contrast to the less
visionary transactional leadership style (see Illustration 6.5). These two concepts
were introduced by Burns (1978) and have been influential in leadership theory
and research. Transactional leadership is based on giving people rewards for
doing what the leader wants. Transformational leadership which borrows much
from Weber's ideas about charisma relies on giving followers a purpose, a vision
of something to aim for and on creating follower identification with the leader.
Transactional leaders make minor adjustments to mission and the ways people
are managed. Transformational leaders make big changes to mission and culture
and so in theory make bigger impacts upon change.

lilustration 6.5
:'H ;· >.::.'J;J:/:;iCJ . -::.: ..
:.PW.,rihariStricnriorks . . .
;~re~·~;J~Js~~i~~:~ra.ns~ctional le~ders~i~· ..-·· : . ,., . · :.. . '.· ., :.,-h,-·. ·· ·. ·trewards.for
, , ,, ,· '·>':·..: .'.··::::·,, ·'· '.-•.:: .. . . .: ;· .. ,,: .!_; ; .. ". . . ward exchanges set-up,.. exc a~~e. o , ·.. . .
• ContlndentieWa~d:-'to what extent are r.n~am_ngful re riiti~n of accpmpllsh~~n\s? '.::· ' ,. :· .',: . , .. .. . -
effort ,.p.. 1• i,·; ;'::., -f;. ··: . .rd. fo..r good perfonna~c:~ and recog . 'tlc:i°pate·problems an<:f lnti')rvene with
. . , .., ron:use o rewa s . , . : . .. xt t do leaders an . . , , , . _. •_• - •
•Managem~ntbye~ception(active):'to _what__e_en ' .. : . ,· .. · . _·.': .._:. '. f,. · .''. __ ,. . ·
C0 ·; ···-. '- .-.•. · · · ·· · I e? · · · It f problems to anse be ore · ·.·
rrect1ve action before problems ar s · · t do leaders wa or .. · . . ·., · ·: ·., : ·
• M ·· · · · ·· · ·. · 1 ,,. to what exten
. anagement by exception (pass ve,. . .,. · • · - ·· · __. . .. .· •·
·. · .
intervening? :. ··· -:: · · ·

]91
f'0:1!:.,_
f~?Qif Chapter 6 Leadership and change

·<,'!

Figure
·?$
6.6 presents a model of transformational leadership that includes not; :

only the leader's characteristics, attitudes and behaviour but also the reacti_g_tifil
& 11
of 10 owers. .:'·,,;-2
.,,;
Transformational leadership behaviours add to the two dimensions of lead,~
ship identified in both the Ohio State and Michigan University studier.J6_1
summarise, in much of the leadership literature there is a general assumpapj
now that transformational leadership is the way ahead and that where radii:~

Figure 6.6 Transformational leadership

,_-:~
Source: Adapted from Bass, B.M. (1990) by George, J. and Jones, G. Understanding and Managln9':
Organizational Behaviour (4th edn), Harlow: Pearson Prentice Hall, p. 394. ·'. .~1

192
 Approaches to leadership theory

changes are called for it is more likely to be effective. Bass (1990, P· 20) g~e~ so
far as t~ sa~ that transactional leadership is, in many instances, 'a prescn~t1on
for m _e diocnty', arguing that only transformational leadership can make a differ-
ence m an organization's performance at all levels.
~es~ two leadership styles are not mutually exclusive; transformational _lead-
ership IS thought to compliment transactional leadership to leverage higher
~erformance by followers (Bass and Avolio, 1993). Transactional leadershi_p on
its own will deliver a certain performance but if an overlay of transformational
leadership is present then performance can be enhanced. Judge and Piccolo
(2004, P· 765) found that the two styles 'are valid concepts but that they are so
highly related that it makes it difficult to separate their unique effects' in studies
linking leadership to performance. There is a little evidence that women display
more transformational behaviours than men but the differences are small (Eagly
et al., 2003). However, these results are encouraging for those working to see
more women in top management roles.
Researchers have looked for connections between personality traits and trans-
formational leadership but the results are 'generally weak' (Bono and Judge, 2004).
Of the 'big five' personality factors only extroversion appears to predict it. This
makes sense because extroverts are characterized by positive emotions, enthusi-
asm, confidence and good communication skills. The results suggest that
personality (in so far as it can be assessed through questionnaires) does not predict
much leadership behaviour. Given that personality is a stable trait of individuals
'I
this evidence supports the idea that much leadership behaviour can be learned.

Illustration 6.6

193
to"-••o~
~{5.gj; Chapter 6 Leadership and change
!;\<al¾""•'

. , ,;~
Michael O'Leary (see Illustration 6.6) appears to have a well-defined leader~}I
style that for Ryanair, at least, correlates with strong business performantt\iw.j
to what extent is the style transferable to other organizations? Would h_ $~I
effective in the Diplomatic Service? We may never know - but it seems clear !lf!~
different leadership styles are needed to connect with different organizatio~)
situations.

194
 253
Approaches to leadership theory

Al th0 ugh transformational leadership has captured the imagination of

researchers
. and executives
• there are a few problems with it (Parry and Bryma n '
2006). First ' it wa s usually studied in the context of top managers on IY· The
second
. problem rel at es to the motives of those credited with bemg
• trans f orm a-
t~onal,- Doubts arise about the integrity of what is happening in some leadership
situations
. . with
. some Ieaders appearmg . to be shameless self-promoters manu fac-
turmg situations for their own benefit.

Team and distributed leadership

Reich (l991) warns against the idea of reifying the leader as hero, and Landrum,
~owell and Paris (2000) argue for a team approach to designing and implement-
mg ~ha~ge. Team and distributed leadership theory moves away from the single
heroic figure and recognizes that leadership can be shown by people throughout
the organization. Robbins and Coulter (2005, p. 435) echo this view, suggesting
that one of the cutting-edge approaches to leadership is team leadership. They
maintain that the attributes of leaders discussed in much of the literature need
to be adapted when managing in a team setting. For instance, 'they (leaders)
have to learn skills such as having the patience to share information, being able
to trust others and to give up authority, and understanding when to intervene.'
These authors propose four key areas that distinguish team leadership from the
leader as heroic individual:
1 the ability to act as a liaison with people and departments external to
the team;
2 the ability to act as troubleshooters to try and resolve issues/problems at
team level;
3 the ability to resolve conflicts at team level;
4 the ability to act as coach ensuring that all team members develop to their
full potential.
These abilities go some way to meeting what Kotter (1996, p. 172) says twenty-
first century organizations need: ·
• fewer bureaucratic structures with fewer rules and employees;
• fewer hierarchical levels;
• management training and support systems for all;
• a culture that is externally oriented, empowering, quick to make decisions,
open and candid, more risk tolerant.
Having said this, moving from operating bureaucratically to a team-based struc-
ture is not easy as Illustration 6. 7 shows. · ·

195
J;1-t,\:m.-...
f/~§'.1;~\
~~;.:;~~...• Chapter 6 Leadership and change

!t;t~<kj~~:,~~i!tit~iiii~J;iJ1iJ~iiilftt~j~
; :_lllustra~iory 6~7]

'.'.;.
·:.·.:·· .,I .serv1'ces~tvpe:.,,;:;.;r,,
., ..~• ;0-···-
:-.:,,,,c;,.,, ..'i'.i"'"-••se·,,.,,.-
,;,,:>.W,/:i;~~(StiOU
·g·'g~· · r-•,,...~•-•ct"•·
. .,. •··a·ii,;:,
•-< d .:.•1rc-~!:t'•~· "o'''.'1i
·•' be'cause,
·x'•~· l\= ·t (? :fi:l.'Jdi
: 8 _.
!,:
-~::-...· . . perineu;\,1 .9J~/(.8!"!)!11~...,;·,.. ,;'tic"-'" . •c::/r-,;,;- ,k"'.
··ij·t:i.:'e'~·t"e:~a-s'-!'.:'1· <,,.-;,,, -~ , ••.•,~..,,.::~f) ".),:'.\\r:'{;_",<,i''-: ,,•r:A;'.!;,'~..~i!~1riJ.;_
,.,, ify;o,iqgfr.yrng-o... ,.a· arg.,,.sca e,• ..,•,-.1!;·,,\, .-.-, ·•.-1.
;;. ·G.·g,w.or.,
'tftifi1nfra reel;,
~i~tt~:.?Lt,., . S•}ti'''•:1t1~IB~~\~hi
..".n : "',.;J''~,Jr1• -~,
}X @niJ6}}tf'"~. ~.-~, -~· '-"•"''' ,..,
•'".' ..t•·-.1.·, ·,..,_,..,_,
,,t;·-•~ \" - t~.-'!.i,,.r·~•_'t, '. .:,~-:~,,.
{he::researc ,.a: .
··-,., ..• ,.. ..d. ·~:;:.;.-~~-. ;." · ~ -
,i);:...::.,··
:1:·-S - avoure -·--·, . ·•-!' .r-1• .•• w.:;U-- 1,1~
t ·b'··•i-~
~:.•:.-' Jtt
-

) :•~: -·
1
¥hi[Jt '. ;{f.,1,,\~r
11
W~bfl,i~t~rt~i' !Cf;.ip.,.1.-~"-:•_~--T

.:t.-
;~
i:,,
;,:,

t
'(

G
f
1:
u
{
i :.

..
:,.:.
,·
,·,

.,,,
'-'
...
:_:, .
._;.;

.:t
.
:·.: •

li9Rt.:, ~
,.:manager ·
iffi#t)~a,:t·lltih!il~illlili'lt,,"'.<'··•··
.. ··
'rn
_...
ICU .,o:grve up.- err>,·~•i . :·,:.. ·._:.-"!lr\lroduc ng·Teainworl<WiuiirfaBimiaucratfcMaze';'
.elll.,, -•-• k ·•·

if~~!t;§,~if,tt\il\t~-~~t?~;!;t;t~fl~tt::w~;r;\t;~t:fft~]~;ttf~I;8xiitt1itt1;1~~~ri

196
 Approaches to leadership theory t
...J"i,~16;
7
Teamwork ernphas·
h. izes concepts h d1 d
ers 1p roles, individual a sue as interacting or coordinating, share ea -
nd
decisions by con mutual accountability, collective work products and
Semor
• and Swan sensus (Bake ran d Salas, 1997; Katzenbach and Smith , 1993·,
2
ipative leadersh~s, iO?). Much of this reflects the ideas of democratic or partic-
individual. An al:p u: le~dership models often focus on the leader as an
(2002, p. 43 2) as femll ative view of 'distributive' leadership was expressed by Yukl
o ows:
An alternative pers .
adherents is t d pective (to the heroic single leader), that is slowly gaining more
and colle~tive:a efi~e leadership as a shared purpose of enhancing the individual
of a heroic 1 paoty of people to accomplish their work effectively ... Instead
tions ay, di ~~der who can perform all essential leadership functions, the func-
e s uted among different members of the team or organization.
Ddis~buted leadership places leadership 'in the context of participative, shared
ec1S1on making wh· h ti 1 • · · 1
h , IC s mu ates and leads to more effeetive orgamzatlona
c ange' (Anderson et al. 2003, p. 29). It captures the idea of enabling followers
to become leaders and benefits of distributed leadership to senior management
and others are (Storey, 2004, p. 253 ):
• avoiding the overloading of senior staff;
• offering growth and development opportunities across the workforce;
• allowing individuals and groups with the most appropriate capabilities to
make decisions;
• building motivation and commitment. ,i
Yukl goes on to say, 'i\Ilother argument is that, as the environment becomes more
complex, uncertai~ ahd subject to ~apid ch_ange, so must organizations adapt.
This .is usually .inferred as requiring .leaders.at every level, anq most notably per- I
'I
haps in "customer-facing" roles where responsiveness is at a premium.'
Bottery (2004, p. 20) refers to this as 'exciting stuff' with the appeal and
attraction of distributed leadership appearing self-evident. Nevertheless, a
number of caveats are needed. First, visions of distributed leadership must take
account of the asymmetry of power, particularly the accumulation of resources
power attaching ro ~qm,e _form.~~ positions. Senior m~nagE:1'~_and,o~ers might
not wish to share the· ~tatus and ~ymbols that a,ttach to their ~?siti°...ns. ~?~ever
~;':eg~lit~rian an organization is,. power and infl~ence in ~ecision taking are hardly
ever shared equally. Second, not everyone will subscribe to the idea of being a
leader, even if this is an informal one. As Storey (2004, p. 254) says: 'some orga-
. tional members may in reality be rather attached to the relative comfort and
mza . d h
1 k of exposure that may derive from operating un er t e dominant leader
ac d e., Th'u d, di"stributive leadership is concerned
mo . not only with
. matters internal
anl· zation but also with something that extends .outside. However, it is
.
not certam how customers, shareholders b and
, external
k' • policy makers will react to
dealmg. w1'th what might appear to e wea semor managers and multiple
points of decision making.

197
11'11
Chapter 6 Leadership and change

Authentic leadership --- .

As we have noted above, although.d1arismatic and trans_fonnational lead~$,
attracted -a big followinfthey have a shadow side reflecting concerns ~bou;:,;
leader's teal motives and where they have led and where they are leadmg ~o _
organizations. Corporate scandals, mismanagement and the disastrous leaderf·
of financial institutions in the recent past should be enough to make the potjit
Authentic leadership theories offer some antidote to this dark side, tit
~ased on the idea that l"".ders should knOW themselves (hence the term 'aut,l!~
tic') and know how their experiences m hfe have made them what the~~~
(Shamir and Eilam, 2005). The authentic leader knows who tnd .. z. ·:r·what the,j{[f~
.. )
and does not try to copy and mimic some other person or modeh..-.'.fhey.ar¢i
to themselves and are acutely aware ·of their values and ·beliefs. (Avoliqfc_ .
Gardner, 2005) and they are aware of strong moral implications for how tlil'ie
leadership is affecting the organization and their followers. Attributes of aulli~
tic leaders (recall the traits approach at the start of this ch~pter) include:
• Being true to themselves (see llies et al., 2005 and their dis~ssion of a~:"·
tic leaders working in a state of eudaemonia; being self-aware, ·-Gt·
unbiased;-and behaving-authentically). · -__:.:;;
o Humility and modesty (Trevino et al., 2003). This does not meart bemg J.::
on the contrary it means being aware of one's limitations and mistakes Bb _
willing to ~earn from them, seeing the value that others bring to siU:;~
and not bemg an arrogant glory seeker. ..:t "~'
o See.i ng situations from a .range of perspectives, bringing out into the opei\', '""
tens10~s and ~oral dllemmas :xisting within them. .~}~
o I<now1~g on_ e_ s. own sense of nght and wrong and adhering to personatsf.t~
dards m_ dec1S1ons and relatioi:iShips. When times get difficult auth~il
leaders dISplay the moral courage to act consistently and not sacrificed.
held behefs (Verbos et al., 2007). · ··

In our tour of leadershi"p the ones. we haves h _....-

--~
lin_'e and, in a sense, we have returned een ow they ha".e evolved.~,li,
1stics of business leaders that are
twenty-first century and fulfil th
fi:o
th
e begmnmg by describing chafcl:1 ·
enough to lead organizations in t
e expectations of the people that work uh-:,, • " . I~

1_98
 ~,.-::itl~\t
Critical approaches to leadership ey~~
them.
grounds Authentic
for thinkileadersh·1P 15
. a powerful theory and right now there are good
if organizations ng th at business leadership will need to move in this direction
ernment and· are. to eni·o Y support from their employees as well as from gov-
behaviour of e societytr · Recent crises blamed on poor leadership and the
Fred Goodw· x ~~ely well paid leaders after they have stepped down (e.g. Sir
sion fund) a m resisting ca11s for h"im to pay back part of his unfeasibly large pen-
hard to rec ppear to have dented public confidence in leaders who need to work
. over personal an'd corporate reputations.
Having summarized fr om· a largely rational and normative view how thinking
a b.ou
. t l ea d ership has evo1ve d , the d1scuss1on
. . now turns to take a look at more
cntical perspectives.

(j_[J @; Critical approaches to leadership

Stories of leaders who are doing a great job for their organizations are com-
monly found in the management literature. We even found one journal running
a 'leader of the month' page. A typical portrayal is shown in Illustration 6.8 to
give readers a taste of what these stories are like.

Illustration 6.8

J99
 Conclusions

;,. .

!l
·lJ.;
-~~.r,

~
~:: e tD@ Conclusions
Leadership theory began with a search for universally applicable traits and styles
but increasingly recognized that leadership approaches need to fit organizational
contexts. Charismatic and transformational approaches were heralded but it seems
dear that leaders fitting these descriptions can show a dark side. Recent corporate
mismanagement has led to an emphasis on the moral, ethical and self-regulatory
components captured in authentic leadership. Followers can also make good lead-
ers and this recognition has stimulated interest in distributed leadership.
Our understanding of resistance to change, often seen as a challenge to the
power and authority of leaders, is now better understood and good communica-
tion is one of the best strategies for dealing with it. Leaming how to learn from
resistors is a challenge to modem managers and leaders.
Leadership theory is dom_inated by studies from the US and this perhaps
reflects its dominant industrial position and endemic culture of finding and
., "- championing the heroic fi81;1re that saves the day and gets the girl (or boy), even
though they may inflict casualties along the way. Hopefully studies of leadership
outside the North American context will increase and shed new light on ways of
managing meaning and getting others to believe in an organizational vision.
Leadership, together with the other aspects of organizational life, comprise
the context in which change takes place. With the context now in place we can
proceed to the more practical considerations of how to design, plan and imple-
ment change in Part Three.

200

d
 ,· 111,,'.~f.•'),

z•'t4t
~~i:j·~"N'.l Chapter 6 Leadership and ch
. ange
1!lflr.
f}3f8:G,,c,·

201
 p~aised by his company for his turnarciu~cfskiiis: But . Wh~t' do .t ~~np~ ~ecom,e?.'#~~-~611
i~~ .{ _
1 tci·cfo?:Do

after three or four successful assignments ·h·e found . j ha~e· what':it 'takes to learn
!
a d~er~. ;~~y of oper-
himself-in trouble at. all levels. His·~elations hip with. ating7 ,ls .It.m.e?'ls /t Vv:6rtfi. · ~1, ?/}/;r~?i: '., ._;_::···
'.·,: i.: ·~,:
an old_ er, more con·serva~ive.colleague ·In m~rketing .:i~fferra.~Ug~e~ts th?t't~e~?. ~~~}~~~~I!~[n~~~ ~-?,,'~a~-.:.
suffered fro~ 'n:iiscom,municati9'n a~d.mufu_ :!a~~-
al ot' ticul~t.i~~~~J Jt h"~!pJ~ ~:u.~~pg.}~,~-~ t \~\ g~!P~.~;·.
trust. At_each point of disagreem ent Jeff -had taken . . motlv~t1o n;:pra?~' .c~ an. ~ i~~~~.~~~•--~"~~. ~~~7~1~~.'- ·': ·'
. :9~~i;"~t! !~.~~-,~_o!ng -~i~ 9.~/1~~9~~:~ ]6_~:.'t\~edn1~.\~,~-,;·,~-.j~~t~?b.ef~f~r~-?~,. ~P.-~L~~,frl~~ ?,~n1. 0
~!tlC?. f~~h'.
·· r~p~-i~e~.-~!~~~rst P~~!. P~.t!~r~~n~t r~,~t~~-.:.~~.rtif'n ~ ~-~ft:l ~f }) ·-. 1
-~ ~\. mP.R~~~\:,_f~a.p~
1
~~l } t t
, ~ .··_'!1:~1-~·
?9~~-.•~_u·?-~t1.2.~-~~ ~n,~:.~~J.~\tt:g~:~E;J~~~1~ ~~-}2,.: Xt:~r~~-~~fY:.r.~t!!m!~~-.
J1J,'!q1~~2/J;!!J~..\~$/~~!ui;.~ a.R~fS?,~a!.P,assage,
communicate laterally with ·other groups .within .the ...fo ::the.leadersh1p.Jra~si~19r.:a
-·: coriipa'~y:·H~/;ciught :an'd , ~1~ed ;i,;~:;,;:;citllfation ·:, , org~h1~Ho~;,wuf tiet(~r :pr~p
arg_rr9_m(sirtg 'fu~n~gers ·
9 broadened hi~ .:, fodeiid1~t;oies'.lri;jt)ious ine~s~';i,~-.'.'.·<I:.:<:1: / '.' ·, .
..practice ~n'd'fe~dback .that ultimately \ •·· . .•.;,'.i :~ \.::. ;. :;, •~ '°~ L.:···:.:{ ',..~::-~i~:-~-~-::.,·!, :/''
hi ' ~
. . ,. . ~ ": -
•
r . _. ,._·... ,: _... .
•\ , · d... ,• .4 ~.'-~' r-•· -:~( ;
s~-o~s.~fi.,~~-~.Oad !o,. · :., .
, _. • • \ j• • . . .\ ' .. , :,

~e.
J

. _ea.--~~ _P:~~ _i- _ ,".~ ,'.:... • :· ,. .,_ .-::.- ·.-:5 0 Jrgj; ' ii>ami' itf;' . ~Qtl4l:, 'Jo~gh_
s suggest:that Jhe l~adi:irshi p tran- = · ·uaaerahip ';i:1rialic/a/ :7Trri~;-~ ~ll_gils};,?0 04;:p::1/:· y;:.:-: · . ' i .
:...These e):Can:iple ':;.'~~;, ...,. i' •? , . ' , " •... ,J ,,,,.::j ~~ " ••';,•,.•y ~~ r-~l;•YJ'r ;!~·-: ~"::J~}
-s,r.. S-,t ,. • - / r'
"-:k•; -~d· ,: :~·. ·<'1-:r"' f.~,1. ; ' \. . j'{/
, ••
·
i

. ··•,t'i r',.:f~:""1 _~1-.,.., •.~ J~

n·i fvvho ·am I? • · ·• -,: · .•
· ·: .;:,~ · ... ·· · ·· ·<,. ·: .... ,, .. :-.,:• .,··:< ·,;' · ··· -
s 10n can prove e eep·se,f:-questicm .. _ t . ,•,..: •,::, •,• ~ ; :,; ,:•'.; ,l! ,;,,, ,,. ~'.;'\ , , s, • • Is', , I,• •; . .. ,,. ~
1

·.'... ~, ;,_.:• ~ '._ \ ':._-;: • , '.• , / , •, \, .. , . '., ,•: ,,.,, ,.:c:,~.,•;,:·,, ,

1 , ;,,

:•
;_.:

:,,

~ ..

. ,.·
·•
~ '.·

-f~
. :': '

?i!~ t!fJt ~ (i Indicative resources

Armstrong, M. and Stephens, T. (2005) A Handbook of Management and Leadership,
London: Kogan Page. This text provides information on key theories and best prac-
tice related to management and leadership. Included in this is the issue of delivering
change and case examples that support management, leadership and change.
Harvard Business Review (2004) Leadership in a Changed World, Boston,
MA:
Harvard Business School Press. This book (not a text) is part of a series published by
Harvard Business School to compile key writers' ideas in relation to different
business areas. This particular part of the series offers eight 'leading thinkers' on
leadership and the impact of leadership in a changing environment. The key

202
r
.. chapter 6 Leadership and change
'f,/

thinking with this book is leadership and globalization and the future of leadership
in an ever-changing glo_bal economy.

~tt~r~ ~ 9 Useful websites

www.berr.gov.uk/ whatwedo/regiona l/skills/manageme nt-and-leadership /·
page10947.hbnl The Department of Business Innovation and Skills website includes
work on inspirational leadership. Some case studies are also included.
www.nhs.leadershipqualities.nhs.uk This site provides information pn how th~-:
National Health Service sees leadership and describes the behaviour" that the NHt
seeks in its present and future leaders. -·\ T,• ·,·

www.i-l-m.com This is the website of the Institute for Leadership and Management .
and contains research and comment in the field. .;;
www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/index.html This site gives suggestions for the:'.'
100 people whose leadership has shaped our world. -:I~
www.northernleadershipacademy.co.uk This is a good site for information o~ ~
wide range of leadership issues. · ·<:'.

{~; ~ G 8 References

Anderson, L., Bennet, N., Cartwright, M., Newton, W.,
Preedy, M. and Wise, C. (2003) Study Guide, Leading
and Managing for Effective Education, Milton Keynes:
Open University Press. · Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1993) Transformationar;
Armenakis, A., Harris, S.G. and Mossholde, K.W. (1993)
'Creating Readiness for Change', Human Relations,
46(6), pp. 681-704.
Armstrong, M. and Stephens, T. (2005) A Handbook of
Management and Leadership, London: Kogan Page.
Avolio, B.J. and Gardner, W.L. (2005) 'Authentic
Leadership Development: getting to the root of posi-
tive fonns of leadership', Leadership Quarterly, 16(3),
pp. 315-338.
Baker, D.P. and Salas, E. (1997) Team Climate Inventory
Manual and User's Guide, Windsor: ASE Press.
Bar-On, R. (1997) Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical
Manual, Multi-Health Systems, Toronto.
Bass, B.M. (1990) 'From Transactional /ti~
Transformational Leadership: learning to share th~}
vision', Organizational Dynamics, Winter, pp. 19-3iI:f!
Leadership: a response to Critiques, in Chemers, -~fl
and Ayman, R. (eds) Leadership Theory and Resea,:"c~~
Perspectives and Directions, San Diego, CA: Acade~SJ
Press, pp. 49-80. ·,:I;,
Beer, M., Elsenstat, R.A. and Spector, B. (1990) 'Wli~ . ... ~ .
Change Programmes Do Not Produce Changefi~ . ,··,1
Harvard Business Review, November-December, 68.(~ki
pp. 158-166. :~~t:-~
Beer, M. and Nohria, N. (2000) 'Cracking the Code_.Clfj
Change', Harvard Business Review, May-Jti~~ .·.,'it,
PP· 133-141. . · W!~
Blake, R.R. and Mccanse, A.A. (1991) Leadership Dilem11!#f.~
Grid Solutions, Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing. : _,;C:i~

203

Blake, R.R. and Mouton, J.S. (1964) The Managerial Grid,
Houston, TX : Gulf Publishing.
Bono, J.E._and Judge, T.A. (2004) Personality and
Transformati onal and Transactional Leadership:
a meta-analysis , Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5),
pp. 901- 910.
Bordia, P., Hunt, E., Paulsen, N., Tourish, D. and
DiFonzo, N. (2004) 'Uncertainty During
al Change: is it all about control?'
Organization
European Journal or Work and Orga11izatio11al
Psycholo},'Y, 13(3), pp. 345-365.
Battery, M. (2004) The Challenges of Educational
Leaders/tip, London: PCP.
Burnes, B. (2004a) 'Kurt Lewin and Complexity
Theories: back to the future?' Joumal of Change
Management, 4(4), pp. 309-325.
Burnes, B. (2004b) Kurt Lewin and the Planned
Approach to Change: a re-appraisal, Journal of
Management Studies, 41(6), pp. 977-1002.
Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership, New York: Harper & Row.
Clarke, L. (1994) The Essence of Change, Herne)
Hempstead: Prentice Hall.
Collins, D. and Rainwater, K. (2005) 'Managing Change
at Sears: a sideways look at a tale of corporate trans-
formation', Joumal of Organizational Change
Management, 18(1), pp. 16-30.
Conger, J. (1993) 'Max Weber's Conceptualiz ation of
Charismatic Authority: its influence on organiza-
tional research', Leadership Quarterly, 4(3), pp.
277-288.
Cote, S. and Miners, C. (2006) 'Emotional Intelligence,
Cognitive Intelligence and Job Performance',
Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, pp. 1-28.
Dries, N. and Pepermans, R. (2007) 'Using Emotional
Intelligence to Identify High Potential: a metacompe-
tency perspective', Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 28(8), pp. 749-770.
Dulewicz, V. and Herbert, P. (1996) 'Leaders of
Tomorrow: how to spot the high-flyers', Financial
Times, 20 September, p. 16.
Dunford, R. (1990) 'Strategies for Planned Change: an
_exchange of views between Dunford, Dunphy and
Stace', Organization Studies, 11(1), pp. 131-135.
Dunphy, D. and Stace, D. (1988) 'Transformational and
Coercive Strategies for Planned Organizational
Change: beyond the OD model', Organization Studies,
9(3), pp. 317-334.
Dunphy, D. and Stace, D. (1993) 'The Strategic
Management of Corporate change, Human Relations,
46(8), pp. 905-920.
Eagly, A.H ., Johannesen-Schmid t, M.C. and van Enge,
M.L. (2003) 'Tra nsformati onal, Transactional and
References
Lassaiz-faire Leadership Styles: a meta-analysis corn.
and women', Ps)'c/10/ogica/ Bul/etin,
Paring men
129(4), pp. 569-591.
Elsass, P.M. and Veiga, J.F. (1994) 'Acculturation in
Acquired Organizations: a force field analysis', Human
Relations, 47(4), pp. 431-454.
Farkas, C.M. and Wetlaufer, S. (1996) 'The Ways Chief
Executive Officers Lead', Harvard Business Review
May-June, pp. 110-122. '
Fiedler, F.E. (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness
New York: McGraw-Hill. '
fiol, C.M., Harris, D. and House, R. (1999) 'Charismatic
Leadership: strategies for affecting social change',
Leadership Quarterly, 10(3), pp. 449-482.
Ford, J.D. and Ford, L.W. (2009) 'Decoding Resistance to
Change', Harvard Business Review, Mar/April, pp. 99_
103.
Furst, S.A. and Cable, D.M. (2008) 'Employee Resistance
to Organizational Change: managerial influence tac-
tics and leader-member exchange', Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93(2), pp. 453-462.
George, J. and Jones, G. (2005) Understanding and
Managing Organizational Behaviour (4th edn), ·Harlow:
Pearson Prentice Hall.
Goleman, D. (1998) 'What Makes a Leader? IQ and
technical skills are important, but emotional intelli-
gence is the sine qua non of leadership', Harvard
Business Review, November-December, pp. 93-104.
Gordon, J.R. (1999) A Diagnostic Approach to
Organizational Behaviour (6th edn), Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Graen, G.B. and Scandura, T.A. (1987) 'Toward a
Psychology of Dyadic Organizing', Research in
Organizational Behaviour, 9, pp. 175-208.
Graen, G.B. and Uhl-Bien, M. (1995) 'Relationship-
based Approach to Leadership: development of
leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership
over 25 years', Leadership Quarterly, 6, pp. 219-247.
Greiner, L. (1972) 'Evolution and revolution as organi-
zations grow', Harvard Business Review, July-August,
pp. 37-46.
Hackman, R. (1994) 'Tripwires in Designing and
Leading Workgroups', The Occupational Psychologist,
23, pp. 3-8.
Harvard Business Review (2004) Leadership in a Changed
World, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Hayden, W.M. (2006) 'Human System Engineering - A
Trilogy, Part II: may the force be with you: anatomy
of project failures', Leadership in Management and
Engineering, 6(1), pp. 1-12.
Hersey, P. and Bl anchard, K.H. /1993) Management of
Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources (6th
edn J, Engl ewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20:\
r l
~ chapter 6 Leadership and change
Higgs, M. and Dulewicz, V. (2004) 'The Emotionally
Intelligent Leader', in Rees, D. and McBain, R. (eds)
People Management: Challenges and Opportunities,
London: Palgrave-MacMillan.
House, R.J. (1971) 'A Path-goal Theory of Leader
Effectiveness', Administrative Science Quarterly,
September, pp. 321-338.
Ibarra, H. (2004) 'Tough Lessons on the Road to
Leadership', Financial Times, 5 August, p. 11.
!lies, R., Morgeson, F.P. and Nahrgang, J.D. (2005)
'Authentic Leadership and Eudaemonic Well-being:
understanding leader-follower outcomes' , Leadership
Quarterly, 16(3), pp. 373-394.
Hies, R., Nahrgang and J.D. Morgeson, F.P. (2007)
'Leader-Member Exchange and Citizenship Behaviors:
a meta-analysis', Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1),
pp. 269-277.
Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. ~2004) 'Transfo~ ational
and Transactional Leadership: a meta-analytic test of
their relative validity', Journal of Applied Psychology,
89(5), pp. 755-768.
Kanter, R.M. (1991) '(;;hange-motor Skills: what it takes
to be creative', in Henry, J. and Walker, D. (eds)
Managing Innovation, London: Sage.
Katzenbach, J.R. and Smith, K. (1993) Wzsdom of Teams:
Creating tile High-performance Organization, Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kerfoot, D. and Knights, D. (1993) 'Management,
Masculinity and Manipulation: from paternalism to
corporate strategy in financial services', Journal of
Management Studies, 30(4), pp. 659-677.
Kirkpatrick, S.A. and Locke, E.A. (1991) 'Leadership: do
traits matter?', Academy of Management Exea1tive, May,
pp. 48-60.
Kotter, J.P. (1990) A Force for Change: How Leadership
Differs from Management, New York: Free Press.
Kotter,J.P. (1995) 'Leading Change: why transformation
efforts fall', Harvard Business Review, March-April,
73(2), pp. 59-67.
Kotter, J.P. (1996) Leading Change, Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.
Landrum, N.E., Howell, J.P. and Paris, L. (2000)
'Leadership for Strategic Change', Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 21(3), pp. 150-156.
Lewin, K. {1951) Field Theory in Sodal Sdence, New York:
Harper & Row.
Likert, R. (1961) New Patterns of Management, New York:
McGraw-Hlll.
Linstead, s., Brewis, J. and Linstead, A. (2005) 'Gender in
Change: gendering change', Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 18(6), pp. 542-560.
205
I
Lord, R.G., De Vader, C.L. and Alliger, G.M. (1986) 'A
Meta-analysis of the Relation Between Personality
Traits and Leadership Perceptions: an application of
validity generalization procedures', Toumal of Applied
Psychology, 71, pp. 402-410.
Mann, R.D. (1959) 'A Review of the Relationship
Between Personality and Performance in Small
Groups', Psychological Bulletin, 56(4), pp. 241-270.
Martin, C.M. (2008) a Meta-analytic Investigation of
the Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and_
Leadership Effectiveness', unpublished D. Ed. disser-:
tation, East Carolina University. "'i • {
McHugh, M. and Bennett, H. (1999) i.~Introducip~:
Teamwork within a Bureaucratic Maze', Tht
Leadership and Organization Develop~ent Jouma1;·
20(2), pp. 81-93. ,,:
Mintzberg, .H. (1979) The Nature of Managerial WorK; :
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. . _J
Murphy, K.R. (ed.) (2006) A Critique of Emotionti~.:
Intelligence: What Are the Problems and How Can Tlier;
be Fixed? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers~;
Nortier, F. (1995) 'A New Angle on Coping witt
Change: managing transition', Journal of Manageifii!Ft~
Development, 14(4), pp. 32-46. ·, ·1
Open University (1996) Book 6, 'Managing Peopl~i
wider view', MBA Course, Milton Keynes: Open
University. ?}
Oreg, s. (2003) 'Resistance to Change: developing•ari;
individual differences ~easure', Toumal of Applied;
. .,.!
Psychology, 88(4), pp. 680-693. .:.1
Organ, D.W. (1988) Organizational citizenship behavio1ii:\
The Good Soldier Syndrome, Lexington, MA: Lexingto#J
Books. ·:/;
Parry, K.W. and Bryman, A. (2006) 'Leadership - uf:
Organizations', in Clegg, S.R., Lawrence, T.B. an~~
Nord, W.R. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Organization:
Studies, London: SAGE, pp. 447-467. ;~;
Paton, R.A. and McCalman, J. (2000) Chang?
• -~ •✓,; ,
Management: A Guide to Effective Implementati~T!'f
London: Sage. · tJi:
Piderit, S.K. (2000) 'Rethinking Resistance ariai
' Recognizing Ambivalence: a multidimensional ~~~
of attitudes toward an organizational chan~~;?.
Academy of Management Review, 25(4), pp. 783-794.<~1
Post, J.M. (1986) 'Narcissism and the Charismat_ff~
Leader-follower Relationship', -Political Psychology}
7(4), pp. 675-688. ti~~
Quinn, R.E. (1988) Bey,ond Rational Manageni~~l
Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands,Qf:)
High Perfonnance, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. . :.-,.•;q
..:;.
 Refe renc es

g the Right Cha nge Path'

9 6) 'Cho osin F' • 1

Strebel, P• (19Management, Part 14 , mnnc1a/ Times ,

9) 'Phases and .
Rashford, N.S. and Cog hlan , D. (198 Mastermg
tiona l Chan ge', /011mal of
Levels of Orga nisa 5 7
R and Schm idt, W.H . (1973) 'How to
, 4(3), pp. 17-2 2. PP· -b · ,
Managerial Psychology Tann en aum , · ess
', in Henry, J. and eade rship Patt ern , Harvard Busin
Reich, R.ll. (1991) 'The Team as Hero Cho ose a L
on: Sage. May-June, pp. 162- 180.
Walker, D. (eds) Managing Innovation, Lond .
Re1•1cw, 51 I man , L.P. (2003) 'A
- waiting for the ..,. L K Brown ' M. and Hart
Rippin, A. (2005) Marks and Spencer Trev1110, • -, .
utlve_Ethicaf
warrior, Journal of Organizational Chan
ge Management, Qualitative Investigation of Per:e1~ed Exec
ns from rns1d e and outs ide the
18(6), pp. 578- 593. Leadership: perc eptio
Management (8th an Rela tions, 56, pp. 5-37 .
Robbins, S.P. and Cou lter, M. (2005) executive suite', Hum
96) 'Do Lead ers Mak e a Difference?• ·
edn), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Useem, M. (19 l Times,
) 'The Employee- ent, Part 18, Financia
Rucci, A., Kim, S. and Quinn, R. (1998 Mastering Managem
cust ome r Prof it Cha in at Sear s', Harv ard Business
PP· 5-6. B. (2008) 'Daily
Review, January-February, pp. 82-9 7. Van Dam, K., Oreg, S. and Schy ns,
8) Max Weber: Orga niza tiona l
Run cima n, W.G. and Matthews, E. (197 Work Con texts and Resi stan ce to
: Cambridge ange , devel-
Selections in Translatio n, Canb ridge Change: the role of lead er-m emb er exch
ge proc ess char acteristics',
University Press . opm ent clim ate and chan
de Man agem ent nal Revie w, 57(2),
Senior, B. and Swailes, S. (2007) 'Insi y: An
Applied Psycholog lntem atio
Teams: deve lopin g a team work surv ey instr ume nt',
pp. 313- 334.
, pp. 138-153. Hard ing, c.s.
Verbos, A.K., Gera rd, J .A., Fors hey, P.R.,
British Journal ofMan agem ent, 18(2)
, G. (2005 ) "Wh at's your story?' A 'The Posi tive Ethical
Shamir, B. and Eilam and Mill er, J .S. (200 7)
rship develop-
life-stories appr oach to authentic leade Orga nisa tion: enac ting a Jivin g code of ethic s and
417.
men t', Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), pp. 395- ethic al orga nisa tion iden tity' , Journal of Business
(199 9) 'The Trait s and Lead ersh ip Styles of
Shin , Y.K. Ethics, 76, pp. 7-33.
Inter national
CEOs in Sout h Korean Com pani es', Watson, T. (1994) In Search of Man
agement, London:
agement and Orga nization, 28(4),
Studies of Man Routledge.
pp. 40-48. agem ent Guru ,'
Supervision', in Wensley, R. (1996) 'Mrs Beet on, Man
Smit h, M. (1991) 'Lea ders hip and Finandal Times, 26 April, p. 15.
Smit h, M. (ed.) Analysing Orga nizat ional Behaviour, 'Man agem ent in
Wilson, J.F. and Tho mso n, A. (200 6)
New York: Macmillan. Hist orica l Pers pect ive: · stag es and para digm s',
ky, L. (2005)
Stanley, D.J. Meyer, J.P., and Topolnyts Competition and Change, 10(4 ), pp. 357- 374.
Resi stanc e to Orga nizational
Emploee Cynicism and -goa l Theories
Busin ess Psych ology , 19(4) , 429-459. Woffard, J.C. and Liska, L.Z. (1993) 'Path
Change, Jounal of lysis ', Journal of
O'Br ien, L. (200 5) 'Tran sform ing an of Lead ersh ip: a meta -ana
Stewart, T.A. and 876.
w, February, Management, Winter, pp. 857-
Industrial Gian t', Harvard Business Revie ligence: time for a
Woodruffe, C. (2000) 'Emo tiona l Intel
pp. 114-122. w, 16(4), pp.
Associated with time-out', Selection and Developm Revie
ent
Stodgill, R.M. (1948) 'Personal Factors
', Journal of 3-9.
Leadership: a surv ey of the liter ature ership, London:
Psychology, 25, pp. 35-71. Wright, P. (1996) Managerial Lead
er Behavior: Its Routledge.
Stodgill, R.M. and Coons, A.E. (1957) Lead ions (5th edn),
Description and Measurement, Colu mbu s, OH: Ohio Yuki, G. (200 2) Leadership in Organizat
Rese arch. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall .
State University Bureau of Business Perspectives of
Storey, A. (2004) 'The Problem
of Dist ribut ed Zaccaro, S.J. (200 7) 'Trai t-Ba sed
), pp. 6-16.
Leadership', School Leadership & Man agement, 24(3), Leadership', American Psychologist, 62(1
August, _pp. 251-265.
gers Exploit
Strebel, P. (1992) Breakpoints: How Mana
ess Change, Cam bridg e, MA: Harv ard
Radical Busin
Business School Press.

206

4 on profit and loss, day-in and day-out we can not lose sight of the fact that
The Smile Factory:
Work at Disneyland
JOHN Van MAANE N
Part of Walt Disney Enterprises includes the theme park Disneyland. In its
N factory has its rules.
0 pioneering fonn in Anaheim, California, this amusement center has been
~
a consistent money maker since the gates were first opened in 1955. Apart
from its sociological chann, it has, of late, become something of an
exemplar for culture vultures and has been held up for public acclaim in
several best-selling publications as one of America's top companies, most
notably by Peters and Watennan (1982). To outsiders, the cheerful demea-
nor of its employees, the seemingly inexhaustible repeat business it gen-
erates from its customers, the immacula te condition of park grounds, and,
more generally, the intricate physical and social order of the business itself
appear wondrous.
Disneyland as the self-proclaimed "Happies t Place on Earth" certainly
occupies an enviable position in the amuseme nt and entertainment worlds
as well as the commerc ial world in general. Its product, it seems, is
emotion- "laughte r and well-bein g." Insiders are not bashful about pro-
moting the product. Bill Ross, a Disneyla nd executive , summariz es the
AUTHOR'S NOTE: This paper has been cobbled together using three-penny nails of other
writings. Parts come from a paper presented to the American Anthropological Association
Annual Meetings in Washington D.C. on November 16, 1989 called "Whistle While You
Work." Other parts come from Van Maanen and Kunda (I 989). In coming to this version, I've
had a good deal of help from my friends Steve Barley, Nicloc Biggart, Michael Owen Jones,
Rosanna Henz, Gideon Kunda, Joanne Manin, Maria Lydia Spinelli, Bob Suuon, and Bob
Thomas.
58
..
Thi! Smile Factory 59
corporate position nicely by noting that "although we !ocus our attention
1
this is a feeling business and we make our profits from that.''
The "feeling business" does not operate, however, by managem ent
decree alone. Whatever services Disneyla nd executive s believe they are
providing to the 60 to 70 thousand visitors per day that flow through the
park during its peak summer season, employee s at the bottom of the
organization are the ones who most provide them. The work-a-d ay prac-
tices that employees adopt to amplify or dumpen customer spirits are
therefore a core concern of this feeling business. The happines s trade is an
interactional one. It rests.partly on the symbolic resources put into place
by history and park design but it also rests on an animated workforc e that
is more or less eager to greet the guests, pack the trams, push the buttons,
deliver the food, dump the garbage, clean the streets, and, in general,
marshal the will to meet and perhaps exceed customer expectati ons. False
moves, rude words, careless disregard , detected insincerity, or a sleepy and
bored presence can all undermin e the enterprise and ruin a sale. The smile
It's a Small World
The writing that follows2 represent s Disneylan d as a workplac e. It is
organized roughly as an old-fashio ned realist ethnograp hy that tells of a
culture in native categories (Van Maanen, 1988). The culture of interest is
the Disneyland culture but it is not necessarily the same one invented,
authorized, codified, or otherwise approved by park managem ent. Thus the
culture I portray here is more of an occupational than a strictly organiza-
tional one (Van Maanen & Barley, 1985).
This rendition .is of course abbreviat ed and selective. I focus primarily
on such matters as the stock appearan ce (vanilla), status order (rigid), and
social life (full), and swiftly learned codes of conduct (formal and infor-
mal) that are associated with Disneylan d ride operators . These employee s
comprise the largest category of hourly workers on the payroll. During the
summer months, they number close to four thousand and run the 60-odd
rides and attractions in the park.
They are also a well-screened bunch. There is-amon g insiders and
outsiders alike-a rather fixed view about the social attributes carried by
the standard-make Disneyland ride operator. Single, white males and
females in their early twenties, without facial blemish, of above average
 60
THE DIFFBRENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
height and below average weight, with straight teeth, conservative groom-
ing standards, and a chin-up, shoulder-back posture radiating the sort of
good health suggestive of a recent history in sports are typical of these
social identifiers. There are representative minorities on·the payroll but
because ethnic displays are sternly discouraged by management, minority
employees are rather close copies of the standard model Disneylander,
albeit in different colors.
This Disneyland look is often a source of some amusement to employees
who delight in pointing out that even the patron saint, Walt himself, could
not be hired today without shaving off his trademark pencil-thin mustache.
But, to get a job in Disneyland and keep it means conforming to a rather
exacting set of appearance rules. These rules are put forth in a handbook
on the Disney image in which readers learn, for example, that facial hair
or long hair is banned for men as are aviator glasses and earrings and that
women must not tease their hair, wear fancy jewelry, or apply more than a
modest dab of makeup. Both men and women are to look neat and prim,
keep their uniforms fresh, polish their shoes, and maintain an upbeat
countenance and light dignity to cow;,lement their appearance-no low
spirits or cornball raffishness at Disneyland.
N The legendary "people skills" of park employees, so often mentioned in
0
- Disneyland publicity and training materials, do not amount to very much
according to ride operators. Most tasks require little interaction with
customers and are physically designed to practically insure that is the case.
The contact that does occur typically is fleeting and swift, a matter usually
of only a few seconds. In the rare event sustained interaction with customers
might be required, employees are taught to deflect potential exchanges to
area supervisors or security. A Training Manual offers the proper proce-
dure: "On misunderstandings, guests should be told to call City Hall ...
In everything from damaged cameras to physical injuries, don't discuss
anything with guests ... there will always be one of us nearby." Employees
learn quickly that security is hidden but everywhere. On Main Street,
security cops arc Keystone Kops; in Frontierland, they are Town Mar-
shalls; on Tom Sawyer's Island, they are Cavalry Officers, and so on.
Occasionally, what employees call "line talk" or "crowd control" is
required of them to explain delays, answer direct questions, or provide
directions that go beyond the endless stream of recorded messages coming
from virtually every nook and cranny of the park. Because such tasks are
so simple, consisting of little more than keeping the crowd informed and
moving, it is tierhaps obvious why management considers the sharp ap-
pearance and wide smile of employees so vital to park operations. There
The Smile Factory 61
is little more they could ask of ride operators whose main interactive tasks
with visitors consist of being, in their own terms, "information booths,"
"line signs," "pretty props," "shepherds," and "talking statues."
A few employees do go out of their way to initiate contact with Disney-
land customers but, as a rule, most do not and consider those who do to be
a bit odd. In general, one need do little more than exercise common
courtesy while looking reasonably alert and pleasant. Interactive skills that
are advanced by the job have less to do with making customeIS feel warm
and welcome than they do with keeping each other amused and happy. This
is, of couISe, a more complex matter.
Employees bring to the job personal badges of status that are of more
than passing interest to peers. In rough order, these include: good looks,
college affiliation, career aspirations, past achievements, age (directly
related to status up to about age 23 or 24 and inversely related thereafter),
and assorted other idiosyncratic matteIS. Nested closely alongside these
imported status badges are organizational ones that are also of concern
and value to employees.
Where one works in the park carries much social weight. Postings arc
consequential because the ride and area a person is assigned provide
rewards and benefits beyond those of wage~. In-the-park stature for ride
operators turns partly on whether.or not unique skills are required. Disney-
land neatly complements labor market theorizing on this dimension be-
cause employees with the most differentiated skills find themselves at the
top of the internal status ladder, thus making their loyalties to the organiza-
tion more predictable.
Ride operators, as a large but distinctly middle-class group o[ hourl-y
employees on the floor of the organization, compete for status not only
with each other but also with other employee groupings whose members
are hired for the season from the same applicant pool. A loose approxima-
tion of the rank ordering among these groups can be constructed as follows:
1. The upper-class prestigious Disneyland Ambassadors and Tour Guides
(bilingual young women in charge of ushering-some say rushing-little
bands of tourists through the park);
2. Ride operators performing coveting "skilled work" such as live narrations or
trick-y transportation tasks like those who symbolically control customer
access to the park and drive, the costly entry vehicles such as the antique trains,
horse-drawn carriages, and Monorail);
3. All other ride operators;
4. The proletarian Sweepers (keepers of the concrete grounds);
 62
THE DIFFERENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
5. The sub-prole or peasant status Food and Concession workers (whose park
sobriquets reflect their lowly social worth-"pancakc ladies," "peanut push-
ers," "coke blokes," "suds divers," and the seemingly irrepfaccable "soda
jerks").
Pay differentials are slight among these employee groups. The collective
status adheres, as it does internally for ride operators, to assignment or
functional distinctions. As the rank order suggests, most employee status
goes_ to those who work jobs that require higher degrees of special skill,
relattve freedom from constant and direct supervision, and provide the
opportunity to organize and direct customer desires and behavior rather
than to merely respond to them as spontaneously expressed.
The basis for sorting individuals into these various broad bnnds of job
categories is often unknown to employees-a sort of deep, dark secret of
the casting directors in personnel. When prospective employees are inter-
viewed, they interview for "a job at Disneyland," not a specific one.
Personnel decides what particular job they will eventually occupy. Per-
sonal contacts are considered by employees as crucial in this job-assign-
N ment process as they are in the hiring decision. Some employees, especially
those who wind up in the lower 'tanking jobs, are quite disappointed with
their assignments as is the case when, for example, a would-be Adventure-
land guide is posted to a New Orleans Square restaurant as a pot scrubber.
Although many of the outside acquaintances of our pot scrubber may know
only that he works at Disneyland, rest assured, insiders will know imme-
diately where he works and judge him accordingly.
Unifonns are crucial in this regard for they provide instant communica-
tion about the social merits or demerits of the wearer within the little world
of Disneyland workers. Unifonns also correspond to a wider status ranking
that casts a significant shadow on employees of all types. Male ride
operators on the Autopia wear, for example, untailored jump-suits similar
to pit mechanics and consequently generate about as much respect from
peers a~ the grease-stained outfits worn by pump jockeys generate from
real motorists in gas stations. The ill-fitting and homogeneous "whites"
worn by Sweepers signify lowly institutional work tinged, perhaps, with a
reminder of hospital orderlies rather than street cleanup crews. On the other
hand, for males, the crisp, officer-like Monorail operator stands alongside
the swashbuckling Pirate of the Caribbean, the casual cowpoke of Big
Thunder Mountain, or the smartly vested Riverboat pilot as carriers of
valued symbols in and outside the park. Employees lust for these higher
status positions and the rights to small advantages such uniforms provide.
63
The Smile Factory
A lively internal labor market exists wherein there is much scheming for
the more prestigious assignments. • " . ,,
· ·1ar market exists although the perceived sexmess .
For women, a sum th
of uniforms rather than social rank, seems to play a larger role. To wit, e
' h h 'de "It's a
rather heated antagonisms that developed years ago w en t e n .
Small World" first opened and began outfitting the ?de operatoi:s with what
were felt to be the shortest skirts and most revealtng blouses m the park.
Tour Guides, who traditionally headed the fashion vanguard at Dis~eyJand
in their above-the-knee kilts, knee socks, tailored vests, black English hats,
and smart riding crops were apparently appalled at being upstaged by their
social inferiors and lobbied actively (and, judging by the results, success-
fully) to lower the skirts, raise the necklines, and generally remake their
Small World rivals.
Important, also, to ride operators are the break schedules followed on
the various rides. The more the better. Work teams develop inventive ways
to increase the number of "time-outs" they take during the work day. Most
rides are organized on a rotational basis (e.g., the operator moving from a
break, to queue monitor, to turnstile overseer, to unit loader, to traffic
controJler,-to driver, and, again, to a break). The number of break men or
women on a rotation (or ride) varies by the number of employees on duty
and by the number of units on· line. Supervisors, foremen, and operators
also vary as to what they regard as appropriate break standards (and, more
importantly, as to the value of the many situational factors that can enter
the calculation of break rituals--crowd size, condition of ride, accidents,
breakdowns, heat, operator absences, special occasions, and so forth).
Self-monitoring teams with sleepy supervisors and lax (or savvy) foremen
can sometimes manage a shift comprised of 15 minutes on and 45 minutes
off each hour. They are envied by others and rides that have such a potential
are eyed hungrily by others who feel trapped by their more rigid (and
observed) circumstances.
Movement across jobs is not encouraged by park management but some
does occur (mostly within an area and job category). Employees claim that
a sort of "once a sweeper, always a sweeper" rule obtains but all know of
at least a few exceptions to prove the rule. The exceptions offer some (not
much) hope for those working at the social margins of the park and perhaps
keep them on the job longer than might otherwise be expected. Dishwash-
ers can dream of becoming Pirates, and with persistence and a little heJp
from their friends, such dreams just might come true next season (or the next).
These examples are precious, perhaps, but they are also important. There
is an intricate pecking order among very similar categories of employees.
..
 64
THE DIFFERENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
Attributes of reward and status tend to cluster, and there is intense concern
about the cluster to which one belongs (or would like to belong). To a
degree, form follows function in Disneyland because the jobs requiring the
most abilities and offering the most interest also offer the most status and
social reward, Interaction patterns reflect and sustain this order. Few
Ambassadors or Tour Guides, for instance, will sto~p to speak at length
with Sweepers who speak mostly among themselves or to Food workers.
Ride operators, between the poles, line up in ways referred to above with
only ride proximity (i.e., sharing a break area) representing a potentially
significant intervening variable in the interaction calculation.
These patterns are of more than slight concern because Disneyland,
especially in the summer, can be compared quite usefully to a college mixer
where across-sex pairing is of great concern (Schwartz & Lever, 1976).
More to the point, what Waller ( 1937) so accurately called the "rating and
dating complex" is in full bloom among park employees. The various
modem forms of mating games are valued pastimes among Disneyland
employees and are often played with corporate status markers in mind.
Thus, when Yvone, the reigning Alice in Wonderland, moved in one
summer with Ted, a lowly sw·eeper, heads were scratched in puzzlement
N even though most knew that Yvone was, in her other life, a local junior
N
college student and Ted was in premed at USC. The more general point is
that romance flourishes in the park and, at least, if folklore is our guide,
marriages made in Disneyland are not uncommon.
Even when not devoted strictly to pa~g-off objectives, employee
pastimes usually involve other employees. Disneyland's softball and vol-
leyball leagues, its official picnics, canoe races, employee nights at the
park, beach parties, and so on provide a busy little social scene for tl:\ose
inrerested. Areas and rides, too, offer social excitement and bonuses such
as when kegs of beer are rolled out at an off-site party after work crews
break turnstile records ("We put 33,147 on the modittain today"), :During
the summer, some night crews routinely party in the early mo~in'~ while
day shift crews party at night. Sleep is not a commodity greatly v'alued by
many employees caught up in a valued social whirl.
The so-called youth culture is indeed celebrated in and out of the park,
Many employees, for example, live together in the large and cheap (by Los ·
Angeles standards) apartment complexes th11t surround Disneyl~d. Em-
ployees sometimes refer to these sprawling, pastel, and slightly seedy
structures as "the projects" or "worker housing." Yet, the spirited attrac-
tiveness of the collective, low-rent lifestyle for those living it is easily
grasped by a few landlords in the area who flatly refuse to rent to Disney-
Tire Smit~ Factory o5
"
land employees during the summer as a matter of principle and, maybe,
sorry experience because these short-term rentals serve as amusement
parks for off-duty Disneylanders. who, as they say, "know how to party."
A fusion of work and play is notable, however, even when play seems
to be the order of the occasion. Certainly no Disneyland get-together would
be complete without ride operators launching into their special spiel
practiced (or heard continuously on tape) at work:
Welcome aboard the African Queen folks. My name is John and I'll be your guitle
and skipper for our trip down these rivers of adventure. As we pull away from !he
loading dock, tum around and take a last look aphe people standing there, it may
be the last time you ever see them ... Please keep your hands inside the bout as
we go past these }iungry alligators, they're always looking for a hand out . .. Ami
now we return to civilization and the greatest danger of all, the California freeways.
The figurative parallel of this party is, of course, the atmosphere of a most
collegial college. It has a literal parallei as well.
Paid ·employment at Disneyland be'gins with the much renowned Uni-
versity'of Disneyland whose faculty runs·a day-long orientation program
(fraditions I) as part of a 40-hour apprenticeship program, most of which
takes place on the rides. In- the classroom, however, newly hired ride
operators are given a very tµorough introduction to matters of managerial
concern-and are tested on their absorption offnmous Disneyland fact, \ore,
and procedure. Employee demeanor is governed, for example, by three ru\ei,:
First, we 'practice the friendly smile.
Secorid, we use only friendly and courteous phrases.
Third;'wd me not stuffy-the only Misters in Disneyland are Mr.Toad nnd Mr. Smee.
. -:~
Empioy~es learn too that the Disneyland culture is officially definet\.
The empl~y¢'e handbook put it in this format:
\l."i. _p-•.(• I
Dis-rl6j'Ci:iripo'-h.te Cul~ture (diz.'ne kor~pr'it kul'cher) n 1. Of or penaining to the
Disney 'oi'ganiiation~ as a: the philosophy underlying all business decisions; b: lhe
comlJli~ent of tbp leadership and management to that philosophy; c: the actions
1akcri by)ndiyjdual cast members that reinforce the image.
.,).·;ii•. .: . '
Lang·4 ~gejs:also a central feature.of university life and new employees
are sch9ql~i.l in-its proper use. Customers at Disneyland are, for instance,
never referred to as such, they are "guests." There are no rides at Disney-
land, onlyi" attractions." Disneyland itself is a "Park," not an nmusemenr
-!
T

66 THE DIFFERENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
center, and it is divided into "back-stage," "on-stage," and "staging"
regions. Law enforcement personnel hired by the park are not policemen;
but "security hosts." Employees do not wear uniforms but check out fresh ·
"costumes" each working day from "wardrobe." And, of course, there are
no accidents at Disneyland, only "incidents."
So successful is such training that Smith and Eisenberg (1987) repo.l."t
that not a single Disneyland employee uttered the taboo and dread words
"uniform," "customer," or "amusement park" during the 35 half-hour
interviews they conducted as part of a study on organizational communi_-
cation. The Los Angeles Times (July 28, 1988) also gives evidence on this
matter, quoting a tour guide's reaction to the employee's annual canoe
races. "It's a good release," she says, "it helps you see the other cast
members (park employees) go through the same thing you do." Whether
or not employees keep to such disciplined talk with one anofher is, of
course, a moot point because the corporate manual is concerned only wit!J
how employees talk to customers or outsiders.
The university curriculum also anticipates probable questions ride op-
erators may someday face from customers and they are taught the approved
N
w
- public response. A sample:
Question (posed by trainer): What do you tell a guest who requests a rain check?
Answer(in three parts): We don't offer rain checks at Disneyland because (1) the
main attractions are all indoors; (2) we would go broke ifwe offered passes; and
(3) sunny days would be too crowded ifwe gave passes.
Shrewd trainees readily note that such an answer blissfully disregards
the fact that waiting areas of Disneyland are mostly outdoors and !hat there
are no subways in the park to cany guests from land to land. Nor do they
miss the economic assumption concerning the apparent frequency of
Southern California rains. They discuss such matters together, of course,
but rarely raise them in the training classroom. In most respects, these are .
recruits who easily take the role of good stµ!ient.
Classes are organized and designed by professional Disneyland trainers ·
who also instruct a well-screened group of representative hourly employ- ,
ees straight from park operations on the approved newcomer; tmining
methods and materials. New-hires seldom see professional trainers in class
but are brought on board by enthusiastic peers who concentrate on,those
aspects of park procedure thought highly general matters to be learned by
an employees. Particular skill training (and "reality shock") is reserved for
the second wave of socialization occurring on the rides themselves as
61
The Smile Factory
bow and when to send a mock bobsled
operators are taug h t, fior examp1e, to stuff an
caroming down the track or, more delicately, the proper ways
·- . .
obese aduJtlcustomer wto the rrudst o c
f hildre n _riding the Monkey car on
the Casey Jones Circus Train or, most problematically, wh~t exactly to tell
an irate customer standing in the rain who, in no uncertnm termS, wants
his or her money back apd wants it back now. .
During orientation, considerable concern ~ placed o~ particular values
the Disney organization considers central to its operations. Th':se va!ues
range from the."customer is king" verities to the more or less umque kmd,
of which "everyone is a child at heart when at Disneyland" is a decent
example. This latter piety is one few employees fail to recognize as also
attaching to everyone's mind as well .after a few months of work experi-
ence. Elaborate checklists of appearance standards are learned and gone
over in the classroom and ·great efforts are spent trying to bring employee
emotional responses in line with such standards. Employees are told
repeatedly that if they are happy and cheerful at work, so, too, will the
guests at play. Inspirational films, hearty pep talks, family imagery, :md
exemplars of corporate performance are all representative of the strong
symbolic stuff of these training rites.
Another example, perhaps extreme, concerns the symbolic role of the
canonized founder in the corporate mythology. When Walt Disney was
alive, newcomers and veterans alike were told how much he enjoyed
coming: to the park and just how exactihg he was about the conditions he
observe'd. ·For employees, the cautionary whoop, "Walt's in the park,"
could often' bring forth additional enetgy and care for one's part in the
production .. Upon his death, trainers at the University were said to be telling
recruits.to mind their manners because, "Walt's in the park all the lime now."
Yet, lilcelemployees everywhere, there is a limit to which such overt
company. propaganda can be effective. Students and trainers both seem to
agree o~---~!i'~i;e the line is drawn for there is much satirical bnnrer,
mischie~o«s,winltjng, and playful exaggeration in the classroom. As young
seasonal!eifiployees note, it is difficult to talce seriously an organization
that proyi~.~s its re,tirees "Goldeq Elles".instead of gold watches after 20 or
more ye~f,bfservfce. All newcomers are aware that the label "Disneyland"
has __boflf~~,}HISeri~us and artificial connotation and that a full embrace of
the:Disn~y-~and role would be as deviant as its full rejection. It does seem,
however,, brcause of the corporate imagery, the recruiting and selection
devjces, .. thr.goodwill trainees hold toward the organization at entry, IJle
peer-bas~dJemployment context, and the smooth fit with real student
calendars, the job is considered by most ride operators to be a good one.
 68 THE DIFFBRENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
The University of Disneyland, it appears, graduates students with a modest
amount of pride and a considerable amount of fact and faith firmly
ingrained as important things to know (if not always accept).
Matters become more interesting as new hires move into the various
realms of Disneyland enterprise. There are real customers "out there" and
employees soon learn that these good folks do not always measure up to
the typically well mannered and grateful guest of the training classroom.
Moreover, ride operators may find it difficult to utter the prescribed
"Welcome Voyager" (or its equivalent) when it is to be given to the
20-thousandth human being.passing through the Space Mountain turnstile
on a crowded day in July. Other difficulties present themselves as well, but
operators learn that there are others on-stage to assist or thwart them.
Employees learn quickly that supervisors and, to a lesser degree, fore-
men are not only on the premises to help them, but also to catch them when
they slip over or brazenly violate set procedures or park policies. Because
most rides are tightly designed to eliminate human judgment and minimize
operational disasters, much of the supervisory monitoring is directed at
activities ride operators consider trivial: taking too long a break; not
wearing parts of one's official uniform such as a hat, standard-issue belt,
N or correct shoes; rushing the ride (although more frequent violations seem
-I- to be detected for the provision of longer-than-usual rides for lucky
customers); fraternizing with guests beyond the call of duty; talking back
to quarrelsome or sometimes merely querisome customers; and so forth.
All are matters covered quite explicitly in the codebooks ride operators are
to be familiar with, ana violations of such codes are often subject to instant
and harsh discipline. The firing of what to supervisors are "malcontents,"
"trouble-makers," "bumblers," "attitude problems," or simply "jerks" is a
frequent occasion at Disneyland, and among part-timers, who are most
subject to degradation and being fired, the threat is omnipresent. There are
few workers who have not witnessed firsthand the rapid disappearance of
a co-worker for offenses they would regard as "Mickey Mouse." Moreover,
there are few employees who themselves have not violated a good number
of operational and demeanor standards and anticipate, with just cause, the
3 Disneyland offers its ride operator personnel are those that come from
violation of more in the future.
In part, because of the punitive and what are widely held to be capricious
supervisory practices in the park, foremen and ride operators are usually
drawn close and shield one another from suspicious area supervisors.
Throughout the year, each land is assigned a number of area supervisors
who, dressed alike in short-sleeved white shirts and ties with walkie-talkies
hitched to their belts, wander about their territories on the lookout for
The Smilli Factory 69
~
deviations from park procedures (and other signs of disorder). Occasion-
ally, higher level supervisors pose in "plainclothes" and ghost-ride the
various attractions just to be sure everything is up to snuff. Some area
supervisors are well-known among park employees for the variety of
surreptitious techniques they employ when going about their monitoring
duties. Blind observation posts are legendary, almost sacred, sites within
the park ("This is where Old Man Weston hangs out. He can see Dumbo,
Storybook, the Carousel, and the Tea Cups from here"). Supervisors in
Tomorrowland are, for example, famous for their penchant of hiding in the
bushes above the submarine caves, timing the arrivals and departures of
the supposedly fully loaded boats making the 81,,2 minute cruise under the
polar icecaps. That they might also catch a submarine captain furtively
enjoying a cigarette (or worse) while inside the conning tower (his upper
body out of view of the crowd on the vessel) might just make a supervisor's
day-and unmake the employee's. In short, supervisors, if not foremen,
are regarded by ride operators as sneaks and tricksters out to get them and
representative of the dark side of park life. Their presence is, of course, an
orchestrated one and does more than merely watch over the ride operators.
It also draws operators together as cohesive little units who must look out
for one another while they work (and shirk).
Supervisors are not the only villains who appear in the park. The
treachery of co-workers, while rare, has its moments. Pointing out the code
violations of colleagues to foremen and supervisors-usually in secret-
provides one avenue of collegial duplicity. Finks, of all sorts, can be found
among the peer ranks at Disneyland, and although their dirty deeds are
uncommon, work teams on all rides go to some effort to determine just
who they might be and, if possible, drive them from their midst. Although
there is little overt hazing or playing of pranks on newcomers, they are
nonetheless carefully scrutinized on matters of team (and ride) loyalty, and
those who fail the test of "member in good standing" are subject to some
very uncomfortable treatment. Innuendo and gossip are the primary tools
in this regard, with ridicule and ostracism (the good old silent treatment)
providing the backup. Since perhaps the greatest rewards working at
belonging to a tight little network of like-minded and sociable peers where
off-duty interaction is at least as vital and pleasurable as the on-duty sort,
such mechanisms are quite effective. Here is where some of the most
powerful and focused emotion work in the park is found, and those subject
to negative sanction, rightly or wrongly, will grieve, but grieve alone.
 70
THE DIFFERENTIATION PBRSPBCTIVE
Employees are also subject to what might be regarded as remote con-
trols. These stem not from supervisors or peers but from thousands of
paying guests who parade daily through the park. The public, for the most
part, wants Disneyland employees to play only the roles for which they are ·
hired and costumed. If, for instance, Judy of the Jets is feel_ing tired,
grouchy, or bored, few customers want to know about it. Disneyland
employees are expected to be suMy and helpful; and the job, with its
limited opportunities for sustained interaction, is designed to sµpport such
a stance. Thus, if a ride operator's behavior drifts notic~ably away from
the norm, c~stomers are sure to point it out-"Why aren't you smiling?"
"What's wrong with you?" "Having a bad day?" "Did Goofy step on your
foot?" Ride operators learn swiftly from the constant hints, glances, glares,
and tactful (and tactless) cues sent by their aqdience what their role in the
park is to be, and as Jong as they keep to it, there will be no objections from
those passing by.
I can remember being out on the river looking at the people on the Mark Twain
N looking down on the people in the Keel Boats who arc looking up at lhc:qt. l'dcome
V,
- by on my raft and they'd all tum and srarc at me, Ifl gave them a linle wave and
a grin, lhey'd aJl wave back and smile; alJ ten thousand of them. I always wondered
what would happen ifl gave them the finger? {Ex-ride operator, 1988)
Ride operators also learn how different categories of customers respond
to them and the parts they are playing on-stage. For example, infants and
small children are generally timid, if not frightened, in their presence.
School-age children are somewhat curious, aware that the oper11tor is at
work playing a role but sometimes in awe of the role itself. Nonetheless, ''.
these children can be quite critical of any flaw in the operator's perfor-
mance. Teenagers, especially males in groups, present problems because.
they sometimes go to great lengths to embarrass, challenge, ricficule, or· .
outwit an operator. Adults are generally appreciative and approving of an/ \
operator's conduct provided it meets their rather minimal stand11rds, but;
they sometimes overreact to the part an operator is playing (J?ositively) if;
accompanied by small children. A recent study of the Easter Burioy points:
out a similar sort of response on the part of adulfs to fan,asy; ·(Hickey,:
Thompson, & Foster, 1988). It is worth noting too that'°adults o?til~mtieri
children in the pork by a wide margin. One count reports an aduJt..:to-chiJ-: .
dren ratio of four-to-one (King, 1981). ·; · ··
The point here is that ride operators learn what the public (oi, at least, ;
their idealized version of the public) expects of their role and find it easier,
7\
The Smile Factory
to conform to such expectations than not. Moreover, rhey discover thnt
when they are bright and lively others resporid to them in like ways. 111is
Ooffqtancsque balancing of the emotional exchange is such that ride
oper11t~rs,come to expect good treatment. They assume, with good cause,
that .most_. people will react to their little waves and smHes with some
affecf:iop. and perhaps joy. Wtien.they do not, it can ruin a ride operator's d:iy.
With this interaction formula ~n mind, it is perhaps less difficult to see
why ride operators detest and scorn the ill-mannered or unruly guest. At
times,.these grumpy, careless, or otherwise unresponsive characters insult
the very role the operators play and have come to appreciate-"You can't
treat the Captain of the USS Nautilus like that!" Such out-of-line visitors
offer breaks from routine, some amusement, consternation, or the occn-
sional job challenge that occurs when remedies are deemed necessary 10
restore employee and role dignity.
By,,anq large, however, the peoplp-processing tasks of ride opernrors
pass good naturedly and smoothly, with operators hardly noticing much
more than the bodies passing in front of view (special bodies, however,
merit special attention as when crew members on the subs gather to assist
a young lady in a revealing outfit on board and then linger over the hnrch
to ad~ire the view as she descends the steep steps to take her seat on the
boat), ,Yet, sometimes, more than a body becomes visible, as happens when
customers overstep their roles and challenge employee authority, insult an
operator, pr otherwise disrupt the routines of the job. In the process, guests
become "dufusses," "ducks," and "assholes" (just three of mnny derisive
terms.useµ by ride operators to.label those customers they believe to have
gone beyond the pale). Normally, these characters nre brought to the
attention of park security officers, ricfe foremen, or area supervisors who,
in tum; decide how.they arc to be disciplined (usually expulsion from the
park),.. · , ;i . ..
· Occasionltlly,:howeve r, the alleged slight is too personal or simply too
. -I • .
extraor~lj)i for !l ri~e operator to Jet it pass unnoticed or merely inform
othe~:and flllow(them to decide what, if anything, is to be done. Restoration
of one.'.s!r~spect,µi,called for and routine practices have been developed for
these c¥,µm~t~ces .. For example, common remedies include; the "sea1bel1
squeeze/I a srn8;11-tokeq of appreciation given to a deviant customer con-
sistingio.~jtlle '!l~d cµich~pg-up_ of a required seatbelt such that rhe passen-
ger is .doqbfed,over at tJle. pomt of departure and left gasping for the
duration),fithe trip; the "break-toss," an acrobatic gesture of the Autopin
trade illtref?Y,. _pperators jqmp on the outside of a norm violator's car,
stealth~(y unhitching the safety belt, then slamming on the brnkes, bringing
1
. ·,•(:,;,
 72
THE DIFFERENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
the car to an almost instant stop while the driver flies on the hood of the
car (or beyond); the "seatbelt slap," an equally distinguished (if primitive)
gesture by which a!} offending customer receives a sharp, quick snap of a
hard plastic belt across the face (or other parts of the body) when entering
or exiting a seat-belted ride; the "break-up-the-party" gambit, a queuing
device put to use in officious fashion whereby bothersome pairs are
separated at the last minute into different units, thus forcing on them the
pain of strange companions•for the duration of a ride through the·Haunted
Mansion or a ramble on Mr. Toad's Wild Ride; the "hatch-cover ploy,'' a
much beloved practice of Submarine pilots who, in collusion with mates
on the loading dock, are able to drench offensive guests with water as their
units pass under a waterfall; a11d, lastly, the rather ignoble v11riants of the
"Sorry-I-didn't-see-y our-hand" tactic, a savage move designed to crunch
a particularly irksome customer's hand (foot, finger, arm, leg, etc.) by
bringing a piece of Dis~eyland property to bear on the appendage, such as
the door of a Thunder Mountain railroad car or the starboard side of a
Jungle Cruise boat. This latter remedy is, most often, a "near miss"
designed to startle the little criminals of Disneyland.
All of these unofficial" procedures (and m,any more) are learned on the
N job. Although they are used sparingly, they are used. Occasions of use
provide a continual stream of sweet revenge talk to enliven and enrich
°'
colleague conversation at break time or after work, Too much, of cQurse,
can be made of these subversive practices and the rhetoric that surrounds
their use. Ride operators are quite aware that there are limits beyond which
they dare not pass. If they are caught, they know that restoration of
corporate pride will be swift and clean.
In general, Disneyland employees are remarkable for their forbea,;ance
and polite good manners even under trying conditions. They are taught,
and some come 10 believe, for a while at least, that they are i::enlly
"on-stage" at work. And, as noted, surveillance by supervisory personnel
certainly fades in light of the unceasing glances an employee receives from
the paying guests who tromp daity through the park in the summer.
Disneyland employees know well tbat they are part qf the product being
sold and learn to check their more discriminating manners in favor ~f the
generalized countenance of a cheerful lad or lassie.whose enthusias~ and
dedication is obvious to all. . dismantl~fl;?~Jltc::y ,are se~ aside as employees are schooled in the use of
At times, the emotional resources of employees appear awesome. When
the going gets tough and the park is jammed, the nerves of all employees
are frayed and sorely tested by the crowd, din, sweltering sun, and :eye-
burning smog. Customers wait in what employees call "bullpens" ·(and
The Smile Factory 73
park officials call "reception areas") for up to several hours for a 3 ½ minute
ride . that , op~n{tors .a.re sometimes hell~bent on cutting to 2 ½ minutes.
Surely a: mci,:iument.- to the human. ability to suppress feelings has been
created,when:both users and providers alike can maintain their composure
and seeming regard,for one another when in such a fix.
It ·is ~ -this ,domain-where corpqrate culture and the order it helps to
sustain mµst:be given its_dµe. Perhaps the depth of a culture is visible only
when. its-.members are under the gun. The orderliness..-a good part of the
Disney formula for financial success-is an accomplislµnent based not
only on physical design and elaborate procedures, but also on the Iow-
level, part-time employees who, in the final analysis, must be willing, even
eager, to. keep the show afloat. The ease with which employees glide into
their kindly and smiling roles is, in large measure, a feat of social engi-
neering. Pisneyland does not pay wen, its supervision is arbitrary and
skin-close; its working conditions are ~haotic; its jobs require minimal
amounts of intelligence or judgment; and asks a kind of sacrifice and
loyalty of its employees thl\t is almost filna~ical._ Yet, it attracts a particu-
larly able workforce whose personal. backgrowt1d!! suggest abilities far
exceeding those required of a Disneyland traffic cop, people stuffer, queue
or line m!mager, and button pusher. As I have suggested, not all of Disney-
land is covered by the culture put fonh by ,management. There are numerous
pockets of resistance and various degrees of autonomy maintained by
employees. Nonetheless, adherence and support for the organization are
rem11,rkable. {\nd, like swallows returning to Capistrano, many part-timers
look forward to their migration back to the park for several seasons.
'
The Disney Way.
Four f~a.Jrel_all~ded to in this unofficial guide to Disneyland seem to
account fQl'.:~igo~d\ deal of the social order that obtains within U1e park.
First~ soc;_i_l\lf~~!ion\ ,l\lthouglt costly, is, off ltlOSt selective, collective,
intensiVC?~s.~f.ial,_~c~uenttal, ;md closed sort. These tactics are notable for
their pen~~t_i9.q,.into the.private spheres of individual thought and feeling
(Van M~~~n:;~r _Scheiq, 1979). Incorytlng identities are not so much
new. ide~~tj~S; Qf tp.e situational sort. Many of these are symbolically
. powerful:·-!Ul~• for sorpe, ladeQ. with social approval. It is hardly surprising
that some__<>t~e.,mpre pi,-oblematic positions in fenns of turnover during
the sumrner:'<,ccur in the food and concession domains where employees
.:L .
 9111
74
THE DIFFERE NTIATIO N PERSPEC TIVE
The Smile Factory
1S
apparent ly find little to identify with on the job. Cowpoke s on Big Thunder
Mountain , Jet Pilots, Storyboo k Princesse s, Tour Guides, Space Cadets, the low thunder of the hordes of customer s coming at them, oblivious of
Jungle Boat Skippers , or Southern Belles of New Orleans Square have less civil restraint and the small children who might be among them. Consider ,
di ffi culty on this score. Disneyla nd, by design, bestows identity through a too, the discomforting pressures of being "on-stag e" aU day and the
process carefully set up to strip away the job relevanc e of other sources of cumulati ve annoyance of having adults ask permissi on to leave a line to
identity and learned response and replace them with others of organiza - go to the bathroom , whether the water in the lagoon is real, where the
tional relevance . It works. well-mar ked entrances might be, where Walt Disney's cryogeni c tomb is
Second, this is a work culture whose designers have left little room for to be found, 5 or-the real clincher -whethe r or not ·o ne is "really real."
individua l experime ntation. Supervis ors, as apparent in their focused wan- The mere fact that so much operator discourse concerns the handling of
dering and attentive looks, keep very close tabs on what is going on at any botherso me guests suggests that these little emotiona l disturban ces have
moment in all the lands. Every bush, rock, and tree in Disneyla nd is costs. There are, for instance, times in all employee careers when they put
numbere d and checked continua lly as to the part it is playing in the park. themselv es on "automat ic pilot," "go robot," "can't feel a thing," "lapse
So too are employee s. Discretio n of a personal sort is quite limited while into a dream," "go into a trance," or otherwise "check out" while still on
employee s are "on-stage ." Even "back-sta ge" and certain "off-~tag e" do- duty. Despite a crafty superviso r's (or curious visitor's) attemptt o measure
the glimmer in an employee 's eye, this sort of willed emotiona l numbnes s
mains have their corporate monitors . Employe es are indeed aware that their
"off-stag e" life beyond the picnics, parties, and softball games is subject is common to many of the "on-stage " Disneyland personne l. Much of this
numbnes s is, of course, beyond the knowledge of superviso rs and guests
to some scrutiny for police checks are made on potential and current
because most employee s have little trouble appearing as if they are present
[-.., employee s. Nor do all employee s discount the rumors that park officials
even when they are not. It is, in a sense, a passive form of resistanc e that
-.J make periodic inquiries on their own as to a person's habits concerni ng sex
suggests there still is a sacred preserve of individuality left among employ-
and drugs. Moreove r, the sheer number of rules and regulations is striking,
thus making the grounds for dismissa l a matter of multiple choice for ees in the park.
Finally, taking these three points together, it seems that even when people
superviso rs who discover a target for the use of such grounds. The feeling
are trained, paid, and told to be nice, it is hard for them to do so all of the time.
of being watched is, unsurprisingly, a rather prevalent complain t among
But, when efforts lo be nice have succeeded to the degree that is true of
Disneyla nd people &1d it is one that employee s must live with if they are
Disneyland, it appears as a rather towering (if not always admirable) achieve-
to remain at Disneyla nd.
ment. It works at the collective level by virtue of elaborate direction. Employ-
Third, emotiona l managem ent occurs in the park in a number of quite
ees-at all ranks-ar e stage-managed by higher ranking employees who,
distinct ways. From the instructors at the university who beseech recruits
having come through themselves, hire, train, and closely supervise those who
to "wish every guest a pleasant good day," to the foremen who plead with
have replaced them below. Expression rules are laid out in corporate manuals.
their charges to, "say thank you when you herd them through the gate," to
Employee time-outs intensify work experience. Social exchanges are forced
the impish customer who seductive ly licks her lips and asks, "what does
into narrow barids of interacting groups. Training and retraining programs are
Tom Sawyer want for Christma s?" appearan ce, demeanor, and etiquette
continual; Hiding places are few. Although little sore spots and irritations
have special meanings at Disneyla nd. Because these are prized personal
remain for each individual, it is difficult to imagine work roles being more
attributes over which we nonnally feel in control, making them commod -
defined (and accepted) than those at Disneyland. Here, it seems, is a work
ities can be unnerving. Much self-mon itoring is involved, of course, but
culture worthy of the name.
even here self-man agement has an organizational side. Consider ride
operators who may complain of being "too tired to smiJe" but, at the same
time, feel a little guilty for uttering such a confession. Ride operators who
have worked an early morning shift on the Matterhorn (or other popular
Notes
rides) tell of a queasy feeling they get when the park is opened for business
1. The quote is drawn from a transcript of a speech made to senior managers of Hurrah' s Club
and they suddenly feel the ground begin to shake under their feet and hear by Bill Ross, Vice President for Human Relations at Disneyland, in January 1988. Elsewhere in
I,,.
 76
. THE DIFFERENTIATION PERSPECTIVE
.
this account I. draw on other in-house
.. publications to d
are: Your Role in the Show" ( 1982) "o· I ocument my tale. Of use in this regard
A h • isney and: The First Thirt y "
pproac roManagement"(l986),andStevenB' • . y ~ars (1985),"TheDisncy
!and (1988). The best tourist guide to the ~iaum s se?11-offi:1al travel guide to Disney-
mdepcn~ent The Unofficial Guide to Disney1!:i. ve read is Sehlinger's (1987) adamantly
2. This account is drawn primaril
pan-time'' ride operator at Disne la~ ~n ~y three-year work experience as a...permanent
maintainedwithafewparkemploy!esand u~gd!he_l~te 1960s._ Spoi:adic contacts have been
instructive. Also, lengthy repeated beach. ~no. tc v1sf1ts, eve~ wath children in tow' have proved
over th ti ' • • Ill crvrcws o a most informal sort have been conducted
. e i;:,st cw summers wath nde operators (then) employed at the park There is a good deal
;:~:t~: a ut Disn~yl_and, and I have drawn from these materials as indica~ed in the text. I must
d . ally th at this rs an unsponsored and unauthorized treatment of the Disneyland culture
an IS ar odds on several points with the views set forth by management.
~-The author serves as a case in point for I was fired from Disneyland for what I still consider
a Mickey Mouse offense. The specific violation--0ne of many possible-involved hair growing
over my ears, an offense I had been warned about more than once before the flnal cut was made.
The form my dismissal took, however, deserves comment for it is easy to recall and followed a
format familiar to an uncountable number ofex-Disneylanders. Dismissal began by being pulled
off the ride after my work shift had begun by an area supervisor in full view of my cohorts. A
• forced march to the administration building followed where my employee card was turned over
and. a shon statement read to me by a personnel officer as to the fannal cause of termination.
Security officers then walked me to the employee locker roam where my work unifonns and
equipment were collected and my personal belongings returned to me while an inspection of my
locker was made. The next stop was the time shed where my employee's lime card was removed
N from its slot. marked "tcnninated" across the top in red ink. and replaced in its customary position
00
- (presumably for Disneylanders to see when clocking on or off the job over the next few days).
As now an ex•ride operator, I was escorted to the parking lot whetc two security officers scraped
off the employee parking sticker attached to my car. All these little steps of status degradation
in the Magic Kingdom were quite public and, as the reader might guess, the process still irks.
This may provide the reader with an account for the tone of this narrative, although it shouldn't
since I would also claim I was ready to quit anyway since I had been there far too long. At any
rate, it may just be possible that I now derive as much a_ part of my identify from being fired
from Disneyland as I gained from being employed there 10 the first place.
4. These tactics are covered in some depth in Van Maanen (1916, 19'71) and V3!1 Maanen
and Schein ( 1979). When pulled together and used simultaneously, a 'PC:°ple proccssm~ system
of some force is created that tends to produce a good deal of con!omu!~ ~ong n:cru_its w::
regardless of background, come to share very similar ~upational 1dennt1cs, mcluding~t h
th think and feel on the job. such socialization practices are common whenever recruits are
bue:Chcd together and processed as a batch and when role iooovation is distinctly unwru:ited on
th part of the agents of such socialization. . , tl "
e 5 The unofficial answer to lhis little gem of a question is: "Unde~ SleWepaJmgD~eau7s ::: ~
. . di . ranees surrounding t ,sney
Nobqdy knows for sure since the amme at~l!C~ms1983· SchjckeJ 1985). OfficiaUy, his a.shes
vagu~ven in the most carefu~ accountsLa os t the deep frecz~ myth is tao good to Jct go
1•
arc said to be peacefully at rest m Forest u rates Disney expropriated and popularized
wni .
of because it so neatly complements all lhos~ auyhan thinking of Walt on ice, waiting for
when alive. What could be _more vault
,~fiP!"°P"~!:d~n his own castle in the Magic
under
technology's 1dss to restore him to • e in a
Kingdom?