Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 797 views

    Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations

    Uploaded by

    api-26008481
    The document summarizes Lawrence and Lorsch's seminal 1967 paper on differentiation and integration in complex organizations. The paper challenges the assumption that there is one best way to organize, arguing that the optimal structure depends on the environment. It finds that as organizations differentiate their subsystems to cope with different environments, they must diligently manage integration to achieve unity. While providing an early empirical study of organizational subsystems, the contingency theory perspective was also criticized for being static and for implicitly assuming environmental determinism over strategic choice.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations

    Uploaded by

    api-26008481
    797 views13 pages
    The document summarizes Lawrence and Lorsch's seminal 1967 paper on differentiation and integration in complex organizations. The paper challenges the assumption that there is one best way to organize, arguing that the optimal structure depends on the environment. It finds that as organizations differentiate their subsystems to cope with different environments, they must diligently manage integration to achieve unity. While providing an early empirical study of organizational subsystems, the contingency theory perspective was also criticized for being static and for implicitly assuming environmental determinism over strategic choice.

    Original Title

    “differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations”

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes Lawrence and Lorsch's seminal 1967 paper on differentiation and integration in complex organizations. The paper challenges the assumption that there is one best way to organize, arguing that the optimal structure depends on the environment. It finds that as organizations differentiate their subsystems to cope with different environments, they must diligently manage integration to achieve unity. While providing an early empirical study of organizational subsystems, the contingency theory perspective was also criticized for being static and for implicitly assuming environmental determinism over strategic choice.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    797 views13 pages

    Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations

    Uploaded by

    api-26008481
    The document summarizes Lawrence and Lorsch's seminal 1967 paper on differentiation and integration in complex organizations. The paper challenges the assumption that there is one best way to organize, arguing that the optimal structure depends on the environment. It finds that as organizations differentiate their subsystems to cope with different environments, they must diligently manage integration to achieve unity. While providing an early empirical study of organizational subsystems, the contingency theory perspective was also criticized for being static and for implicitly assuming environmental determinism over strategic choice.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 13

    “DIFFERENTIATION AND

    INTEGRATION IN COMPLEX
    ORGANIZATIONS”
    La w re n ce & Lo rsch
    1967

    Presented by Hila Lifshitz


    Doctoral Student, Management
    Organizational Analysis

    Feb 23, 2010


    Synopsis: “Pre L&L”

    Which organizational structure is best?

    ?


    Synopsis: L&L

    1 . There is no one best way to organize :


    The best structure is a function of the environment
    2 . Organizations
     are complex and their subsystems need to
    be analyzed separately
    Each subsystem ’ s optimal structure depends on its
    subenvironment
    3 . Due to the high organizational differentiation
    organizations need to diligently manage their
    integration mechanisms

    E n viro n m e
    nt
    O rg
    Research question
     The basic concepts used in this examination of the internal
    functioning of large organizations are differentiation and
    integration
     Differentiation: the state of segmentation of the organizational system
    into subsystems, each of which tends to develop particular attributes
    in relation to the requirements posed by its relevant external
    environment.
     Integration is defined as the process of achieving unity of effort among
    the various subsystems in the accomplishment of the organization‘s
    task.
     Organizations are complex. Past analysis made simplifying
    assumptions or analyzed only limited aspects of the organization

    Research question :
    W h a t p a tte rn o f d iffe re n tia tio n a n d in te g ra tio n o f th e p a rts o f
    a la rg e o rg a n iza tio n a l sy ste m is a sso cia te d w ith th e
    o rg a n iza tio n 's co p in g e ffe ctiv e ly w ith a g iv e n e x te rn a l
    e n v iro n m e n t?
    Unit of analysis and Method
     The primary unit of analysis: The organizational system:
    organizations and their larger subsystems
     An organization = a system of interrelated behaviors of people who are
    performing a task that has been differentiated into several distinct
    subsystems, each subsystem performing a portion of the task, and the efforts
    of each being integrated to achieve effective performance of the system
     The unit of analysis is a sociological entity but they do not view individuals in
    organizations as passive instruments of organization, but as feeling, reasoning,
    and motivated beings.
     They conduct a comparative study of six organizations operating in
    the same industrial environment (plastics industry), mainly using
    interviews.
     They assume that organizations and their subsystems are influenced
    by their environment
     Each major subsystem is seen as coping with its respective segment
    of the total external environment:
     Marketing& Sales market subenvironment
     Production the technical-economic subenvironment,
     research and development the scientific subenvironment.
    H1, H2 : Degree of formalized structure and
    orientation

    H1
    Subenvironment Formalized
    Certainty

    Structure

    H2
    Subenvironment Social vs . Task
    Certainty members ’ orientation
    High Certainty Task orientation
    Moderate Social orientation
    Certainty
    Low Certainty Task orientation
    H3, H4 : Time Orientation and Goals of Members

    H3
    time required to The time orientations
    get

    definitive of subsystem members
    feedback from
    the relevant
    subenvironment

    H4
    Subsystem Subenvironment Goal
    members’ concern
    Marketing & Sales Customers and
    members’ concern competitive action

    Production Operation of equipment and


    members’ concern suppliers actions

    Research and Science


    development
    H5, H7 : integration efficiency and devices

    H5
    Differentiatio Integration efficiency
    n attributes
    [In the same org., for a pair of subsystems with similar degree of requisite
    integration]

    H7
    Environment Integration devices
    requirements
    for
    Differentiatio
    n &
    integration
    H6 : Integration Mechanisms

    H6
    The fit of both Organization performance
    differentiation
    & integration
    subsystems with
    their
    Subenvironment
    Discussion
     Contribution
     The contingency theory challenged the assumption that there is
    one best way to organize and that it cannot be determined
    without considering the org environment
     Their insight about the subsystems of the organization and how
    they effect their members was new and still poses a
    challenges for organizational analysis
     Their emphasis on the tension between differentiation and
    integration as a prime obstacle to manage is still an unsolved
    and important topic in the literature and in the field
     It is the first empirical studies of this kind
     Rakesh Khurana: Contingency theory had a huge impact of the
    organizational field and in a way might have led to the divide
    between micro org behavior (teams…) and Macro Ob (the org
    and its environment)

    Discussion
     Critic and thoughts:
     The organization-environment relationship developed was static and
    deterministic (as acknowledge by the authors)
     Causality is not established from cross sectional data yet they
    implicitly assume that environment usually shapes the org
    (evident in their recommendation to organizations)
     The authors believe they could have done more to recognize the role
    of strategic choice in determining what specific environment the
    organization encountered
     Is contingency theory is the ultimate solution to every important
    debate in the literature? Where will that lead us?


    Where are we heading?
     Is contingency theory is the ultimate solution to every important
    debate in the literature? Where will that lead organizational
    theory?

    You might also like