Managerial Succession in a Factory and Changes in Supervisory Leadership Patterns: A Field Study

Abstract

Managerial succession is a common phenomenon in organizations, and this event is often associated with significant changes in leadership style. Yet the influence of succession on behavior in organizations has received very limited study. The present study combined two kinds of data, clinical onsite observations and longitudinal survey data, to examine the changes in supervisory leadership patterns, group processes, and satisfaction levels associated with a change from supportive-oriented management to taskoriented management. Taken together, these data provide a replication of Gouldner's classic case study of social processes arising out of an unexpected change in the management of an industrial plant. They also lend support to the intermethod reliability of survey research data and clinical observations in assessing the phenomena under consideration.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ARGYLE, M. The social psychology of work. Middlesex, England: Penguin , 1974.

CARLSON, R. Executive succession and organizational change. Danville, Ill.: Interstate Printers and Publishers , 1962.

FIEDLER, F. A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1967.

FIEDLER, F. Leadership and effective management. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman , 1974.

FLEISHMAN, E. Leadership climate, human relations training, and supervisory behavior . Personnel Psychology, 1953, 6, 205-222 .

GOULDNER, A. Patterns of industrial bureaucracy. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press , 1954.

GRUSKY, O. Corporate size, bureaucratization, and managerial succession . American Journal of Sociology, 1961, 67, 263-267 .

GRUSKY, O. The effects of succession: A comparative study of military and business organizations. In M. Jarowitz (Ed.), The new military. New York: Russell Sage Foundation , 1964.

HACKMAN, J. , & OLDHAM, G. Development of the job diagnostic survey . Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 159-170 .

10.

HELMICH, D. Corporate succession: An examination . Academy of Management Journal, 1975, 18, 429-441 .

11.

HELMICH, D. , & BROWN, W. Successor type and organizational change in the corporate enterprise . Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972, 17, 371-381 .

12.

KATZ, D. , & KAHN, R. The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley , 1966.

13.

KOCH, J. Effects of feedback on job attitudes and work behavior: A field experiment. Tech. Rep. No. 6. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. NOOO 14-76-C-0164, Eugene, Oregon: Bureau of Business Research, University of Oregon , 1976.

14.

KOTIN, J. , & SHARAF, M. Management succession and administrative style . Psychology, 1967, 30, 237-248 .

15.

LEWIN, K. Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper and Brothers , 1948.

16.

LIKERT, R. The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill , 1967.

17.

LIPPIT, R. , & WHITE, R. An experimental study of leadership and group life. In T. Newcomb and E. Hartleg (Eds.), Readings in social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston , 1947.

18.

MORSE, N. , & REIMER, E. The experimental change of a major organizational variable . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 52, 120-129 .

19.

SCHWAB, D. , & CUMMINGS, L. A theoretical analysis of the impact of task scope on employee performance . Academy of Management Review, 1976, 1, 23-35 .

20.

TAYLOR, J. , & BOWERS, D. Survey of Organizations. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan , 1972.

21.

WOODWARD, J. Industrial organization: Theory and practice. London: Oxford University Press , 1965.