This paper demonstrates the theoretical relevance and validity of using utility models and scaling techniques as an approach to operationalizing the concepts of goals and goal incompatibilities. The approach was used, with empirical data from municipal government officials in 380 cities, to test the propositions that (1) structural differentiation in organizations is associated with goal incompatibilities, and (2) goal incompatibilities are correlated with conflict in organizations. Both propositions were supported. On the basis of a literature review, it was concluded that (1) the concepts of goals and goal incompatibilities play important, but controversial, roles in organization behavior, and (2) there has been very little empirical research directed toward operationalizing these concepts. On the basis of the empirical research, it was suggested that the approach generates valid operationalizations of goals and goal incompatibilities. Goals which were shared across units tend to be of moderate importance to organizational decision makers within these units, while disagreements regarding goals were found to focus upon unit power preservation and procedures.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AZUMI, K. , & HAGE, J.Organizational systems. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath , 1972.
2.
BALKE, W. M. , HAMMOND, K. R. , & MEYER, G. D.An alternative approach to labormanagement negotiations . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1973, 18, 311-327 .
3.
BEM, D.Self-perception: The dependent variable of human performance . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1967, 2, 105-121 .
4.
BOWMAN, E. H.Consistency and optimality in managerial decision-making . Management Science, 1963, 9, 310-321 .
5.
BRYAN, S. E.TFX: a case in policy level decision making . Academy of Management Journal, 1964, 7, 54-70 .
6.
CARTER, E. E.The behavioral theory of the firm and top-level corporate decisions . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1971, 16, 413-428 .
7.
CARTWRIGHT, D.Influence, leadership and control. In James G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally , 1965.
8.
CORMICK, G. W. Power, strategy and tfie process of conflict: A theoretical framework. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, 1971.
9.
CUMMINGS, L. L. , & SCHWAB, D. P.Performance in organizations: Determinants and appraisal. Glenview, Ill.: Scott-Foresman & Co. , 1973.
10.
CYERT, R. M. , DILL, W. R. , & MARCH,-J. G.The role of expectations in business decision making . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1958, 3, 307-340 .
11.
CYERT, R. M. , & MARCH, J. G.A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall , 1963.
12.
DEARBORN, D. C. , & SIMON, H. A.Selective perception: A note on the departmental identification of executives . Sociometry, 1958, 21, 140-144 .
13.
ETZIONI, A.A comparative analysis of complex organizations. New York: The Free Press , 1969.
14.
GEORGIOU, P.The goal paradigm and notes towards a counter paradigm . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1973, 18, 291-310 .
15.
GERWIN, D.A process model of budgeting in a public school system . Management Science, 1969, IS, 338-361 .
16.
GIBB, C. A.Leadership. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, 2nd ed.Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley , 1969.
17.
GORE, W. J.Administrative decision making: A heuristic model. New York: Wiley , 1964.
18.
GREEN, P. E. , CARMONE, J. F. , & WIND, Y.Subjective evaluation models and conjoint measurement . Behavioral Science, 1972, 17, 288-299 .
19.
GROSS, E.The definition of organizational goals . British Journal of Sociology, 1969, 20, 282-293 .
20.
GUSTAFSON, D. H. , PAI, G. K. , & KRAMER, G. C.A weighted aggregate approach to R & D project selection . AIIE Transactions, 1971, 3, 22-31 .
21.
HALL, R. D.Organizations: Structure and process. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice Hall , 1972.
22.
HOEPFL, R. , & HUBER, G.A study of self-explicated utility models . Behavioral Science, 1970, 15, 408-414 .
23.
HUBER, G.Multi-attribute utility models: A review of field and fieldlike research . Management Science, 1974, 20, 1393-1402 .
24.
HUBER, G. , DANESHGAR, R. , & FORD, D.An empirical comparison of five utility models for predicting job preferences . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1971, 6, 267-282 .
25.
HUBER, G. , SAHNEY, V. , & FORD, D.A study of subjective evaluation models . Behavioral Science, 1969, 14, 483-489 .
26.
KELLEY, H. H. , & THIBAUT, J. W.Group problem solving. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology, 2nd ed.Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley , 1969.
27.
KOCHAN, T. A.City employee bargaining with a divided management. Madison: Industrial Relations Research Institute , 1971.
28.
KOCHAN, T. A. , HUBER, G. P. , & CUMMINGS, L. L.Determinants of intraorganizational conflict in collective bargaining in the public sector . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20, 10-23 .
29.
KUNREUTHER, H.Extensions of Bowman's theory on managerial decision making . Manazement Science. 1969. IS. B415-B439 .
30.
LIEBERMAN, S.The effects of changes in roles on the attitudes of role occupants . Human Relations, 1956, 9, 385-402 .
31.
LIKERT, R.New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1961.
32.
LIKERT, R.The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill .
33.
LOCKE, E. A.Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1968, 3, 157-189 .
34.
LOCKE, E.Job satisfaction and job performance: A theoretical analysis . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1970, 5, 484-500 .
35.
LOCKE, E. , & BRYAN, J.The directing function of goals in task performance . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1969, 4, 35-42 .
36.
LOCKE, E. , CARTLEDGE, N. , & KNERR, C.Studies of the relationships between satisfaction, goal-setting and performance . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1970, 5, 135-158 .
37.
MARCH, J. G. , & SIMON, H. A.Organizations. New York: Wiley , 1958.
38.
MOHR, L. B.The concept of organizational goals . American Political Science Review, 1973, 62, 470-481 .
39.
NUNNALLY, J.Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1967.
40.
PERROW, C.The analysis of goals in complex organizations . American Sociological Review, 1961, 26, 854-866 .
SCHEIN, E. H.Organizationalpsychology, rev. ed.Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall , 1970.
43.
SCHMIDT, S. M. , & KOCHAN, T. A.Conflict: Toward conceptual clarity . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972, 17, 359-370 .
44.
SHULL, F. A., JR. , DELBECQ, A. L. , & CUMMINGS, L. L.Organizational decisionmaking. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1970.
45.
SNYDER, R. C. , & PAIGE, G. D.The United States decision to resist aggression in Korea: The application of an analytical scheme . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1958, 3, 341-378 .
46.
STIMSON, D. H.Utility measurement in public health decision making . Management Science, 1969, 16, B17-B30 .
47.
TANNENBAUM, A. S.Control in organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1968.
48.
THOMPSON, J. D.Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1967.
49.
VROOM, V.The effects of attitudes on perception of organizational goals . Human Relations, 1960, 13, 229-240 .
50.
VROOM, V.Work and motivation. New York: Wiley , 1964.
51.
WEBER, C. E.Intraorganizational decision processes influencing the EOP staff budget . Management Science, 1965, 12, B69-B93 .
52.
WEICK, K. E., JR.The social psychology of organizing. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley , 1969.
53.
WILKIE, W. L. , & PESSIMER, E. A.Issues in marketing's use of multi-attribute attitude models . Journal of Marketing Research, 1973, 10, 428-441 .
54.
ZALD, M. N.Organizational control structures in five correctional institutions . American Journal of Sociology, 1962, 68, 335-345 .
55.
ZALD, M. N.Comparative analysis and measurement of organizational goals; the case of correctional institutions for delinquents . Sociological Quarterly, 1963, 4, 206-230 .
