Offence and Defence: A Symposium with Hinings, Clegg, Child, Aldrich, Karpik, and Donaldson
|
 |
|
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|
CONTRIBUTORS:
|
|
|
JOURNAL:
|
|
|
YEAR:
|
1988
|
|
PUB TYPE:
|
Journal Article
|
|
SUBJECT(S):
|
*Organization-Theory (D590700); *Theoretical-Problems (D864425)
|
|
DISCIPLINE:
|
No discipline assigned
|
|
HTTP:
|
|
|
LANGUAGE:
|
English
|
|
PUB ID:
|
103-362-059
(Last edited on
2001/09/20)
|
|
SPONSOR(S):
|
|
|
ABSTRACT:
In Preface, David Hickson (c/o Organization Studies, Management Centre, U of Bradford, West Yorkshire, England) introduces comments from six active participants in organization studies on a book by Lex Donaldson, In Defence of Organization Theory: A Reply to the Critics (Cambridge, England: Cambridge U Press, 1985 [see listing in IRPS No. 46]). In Defending Organization Theory: A British View from North America, C. R. Hinings (U of Alberta, Edmonton) examines some tensions that have been created over the past fifteen years as the study of organizations, particularly in North America, has moved from sociology departments to business schools. The disciplinary separation of organization theory from the sociology of organizations is judged legitimate, & the separate set of problematics that it faces is explored. In The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Stewart R. Clegg (U of New England, Armidale, Australia) attacks Donaldson's defense of the uniqueness of organization theory for being premised on Popperian moralism, & argues that his definition is too narrow. The tendency to treat organizations as self-contained & their internal struggles as unproblematic & subsumable under their contingent effects is criticized. In On Organizations in Their Sectors, John Child (Aston U, Birmingham, England) argues that Donaldson's defense lacks an adequate appreciation of the role of the environment in the development & transformation of organizational forms, & thus oversimplifies the process. The concept of sector is proposed to describe the SE, material & technical, cognitive, & collaborative network dimensions of organizational design. In Paradigm Warriors: Donaldson versus the Critics of Organization Theory, Howard Aldrich (U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill) contends that there are too many competing theory groups, each with unique paradigms & agenda, to allow for the identification of any single orthodox organization theory. In Misunderstandings and Theoretical Choices, Lucien Karpik (Ecole des mines, Paris, France) examines the relationship between structure & process in organizations & between organizations & the wider social system. The debate concerning the appropriate level of study is seen as beneficial to the discipline. In In Successful Defence of Organization Theory: A Routing of the Critics, Donaldson (Australian Graduate School of Management, U of New South Wales, Sydney) responds to each comment in turn, & reiterates the value of functionalist-positivist theories for organizational research. K. Hyatt
|
|
|
|
STATISTICS
|
|
Click on # to view
|
|
Citations
|
|
0
|
|
References
|
|
0
|
|
Comments
|
|
0
|
|
Quality
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
Interest
|
|
0/0.00
|
|
View(er)s
|
|
2/463
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Prev |
Next |
|