Coherence and complexity: ambiguity and (mis)‐understanding across management teams

This paper examines the concept of cohesion, little discussed in management literature, and proposes the following: Management action derived from intent towards cohesion may mitigate against the development of organizational cohesion, in that apparent conflict between management intent and action inhibits understanding of organizational intent at senior and middle management level, with the result that the divisive response to the failed drive for unitary cohesion inhibits organizational learning.

[1]  Kenneth R. Thompson.  Confronting the paradoxes in a total quality environment , 1998 .

[2]  Esser,et al.  Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research. , 1998, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[3]  P. Senge.  THE FIFTH DISCIPLINE , 1997 .

[4]  M. Hitt,et al.  Strategic Control Systems And Relative R&D Investment , 1988 .

[5]  Lawrence A. Pervin,et al.  Persons, Situations, Interactions: The History of a Controversy and a Discussion of Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[6]  C. Prahalad,et al.  Competing for the Future , 1994 .

[7]  Eliot R. Smith,et al.  Research methods in social relations , 1962 .

[8]  John Hayes,et al.  Cognitive Style and the Theory and Practice of Individual and Collective Learning in Organizations , 1998 .

[9]  J. Terborg,et al.  Interactional Psychology and Research on Human Behavior in Organizations , 1981 .

[10]  Harry Scarbrough,et al.  The Unmaking of Management? Change and Continuity in British Management in the 1990s , 1998 .

[11]  R. I. Sutton,et al.  Functions of Parting CEremonies in Dying Organizations , 1986 .

[12]  Eléonore Mounoud,et al.  Uncovering strategic assumptions: Understanding managers' ability to build representations , 1996 .

[13]  M. Polanyi,et al.  Personal Knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy , 1959 .

[14]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[15]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[16]  John G. Michel,et al.  DIVERSIFICATION POSTURE AND TOP MANAGEMENT TEAM CHARACTERISTICS , 1992 .

[17]  A. Bandura.  The self system in reciprocal determinism. , 1978 .

[18]  J. Pfeffer.  Competitive Advantage Through People , 1994 .

[19]  B. Flyvbjerg.  RATIONALITY AND POWER: DEMOCRACY IN PRACTICE , 1999 .

[20]  I. Janis.  Victims Of Groupthink , 1972 .

[21]  K. V. D. Heijden,et al.  The Learning Organization: How Planners Create Organizational Learning , 1992 .

[22]  J. Harrison,et al.  The Changing of the Guard: Turnover and Structural Change in the Top-Management Positions. , 1988 .

[23]  J. Hendry.  Cultural Theory and Contemporary Management Organization , 1999 .

[24]  Royston Greenwood,et al.  The Reforming Organization. , 1996 .

[25]  M. Jelinek.  Managing change for competitive success , 1993 .

[26]  Mark A. Griffin,et al.  Interaction Between Individuals and Situations: Using HLM Procedures to Estimate Reciprocal Relationships , 1997 .

[27]  Albert Rothenberg,et al.  The Emerging Goddess: The Creative Process in Art, Science and Other Fields , 1979 .