Structural Inertia and Organizational Change

Considers structural inertia in organizational populations as an outcome of an ecological-evolutionary process. Structural inertia is considered to be a consequence of selection as opposed to a precondition. The focus of this analysis is on the timing of organizational change. Structural inertia is defined to be a correspondence between a class of organizations and their environments. Reliably producing collective action and accounting rationally for their activities are identified as important organizational competencies. This reliability and accountability are achieved when the organization has the capacity to reproduce structure with high fidelity. Organizations are composed of various hierarchical layers that vary in their ability to respond and change. Organizational goals, forms of authority, core technology, and marketing strategy are the four organizational properties used to classify organizations in the proposed theory. Older organizations are found to have more inertia than younger ones. The effect of size on inertia is more difficult to determine. The variance in inertia with respect to the complexity of organizational arrangements is also explored. (SRD)

[1]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[2]  R. Merton.  Social Theory and Social Structure , 1958 .

[3]  John Wesley Masland,et al.  The Professional Soldier , 1960 .

[4]  C. Hermann.  Some Consequences of Crisis Which Limit the Viability of Organizations , 1963 .

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

[6]  P. Lawrence,et al.  Organization and environment , 1967 .

[7]  J. Coleman.  Power and the Structure of Society , 1975 .

[8]  K. Arrow.  The limits of organization , 1974 .

[9]  D. Siljak.  When is a complex ecosystem stable , 1975 .

[10]  C. Perrow,et al.  Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. , 1975 .

[11]  G. S. Ladde,et al.  Stability of multispecies communities in randomly varying environment , 1975 .

[12]  K. Weick.  Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems , 1976, Gestión y Estrategia.

[13]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Ambiguity and choice in organizations , 1976 .

[14]  O. Williamson,et al.  Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. , 1977 .

[15]  M. Hannan,et al.  The Population Ecology of Organizations , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[16]  Philip M. Marcus,et al.  The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business , 1979 .

[17]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[18]  L. Mayhew.  Surviving the Eighties , 1979 .

[19]  M. Burawoy.  Manufacturing Consent: Changes in the Labor Process Under Monopoly Capitalism , 1982 .

[20]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  Organizations and Environments , 1979 .

[21]  W. Richard Scott.  Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems , 1981 .

[22]  G. Carroll,et al.  Errata: Organizational Mortality in the Newspaper Industries of Argentina and Ireland: An Ecological Approach , 1982 .

[23]  G. Carroll,et al.  The Liability of Newness: Age Dependence in Organizational Death Rates , 1983 .

[24]  Glenn R. Carroll,et al.  Concentration and Specialization: Dynamics of Niche Width in Populations of Organizations , 1985, American Journal of Sociology.