Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The paper reports a study carried out in South Wales to further evaluate one of the more specific propositions derivedfrom the generalframework of the structural contingency theory of organizations. This relates the extent of centralization of decision-making in an organization to organizational effectiveness under different conditions of market competition. Both behavioral and financial measures of effectiveness are examined. The results obtained differ substantially from those obtained in previous studies carried out in India and Mexico. While it is accepted that such differences could be due to variations in cultural and economic conditions it is suggested that they may indicate significant weaknesses in contingency theory as it is presently stated.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

BOSEMAN, F. G. , & JONES, R. E. Market conditions decentralization and organizational effectiveness. Human Relations, 1974, 27, 665-676.

BURNS, T. , & STALKER, G. M. The management of innovation, London: Tavistock, 1966.

CHILD, J. Organizational structure and strategies of control, Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972, 17, 163-177.

LAWRENCE, P. , & LORSCH, J. Organization and environment, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1967.

MANSFIELD, R. Bureaucracy and centralization: An examination of organizational structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1973, 18, 477-488.

MANSFIELD, R. , TODD, D. , & WHEELER, J. Company structure and market strategy. Omega, The International Journal of Management Science, 1978, 6, 133-138.

NEGANDHI, A. R. , & REIMANN, B. A contingency theory of organization re-examined in the context of a developing country. Academy of Management Journal, 1972, 15, 137-146.

NEGANDHI, A. R. , & REIMANN, B. Correlates of decentralization: closed and open system perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 1973, 16, 570-582.

PAYNE, R. L. , & MANSFIELD, R. Relationships of perceptions of organizational climate to organizational structure, context and hierarchical position. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1973, 18, 515-526.

10.

PAYNE, R. L. , & MANSFIELD, R. Correlates of individual perceptions of organizational climate. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 1978, 51, 209-218.

11.

PAYNE, R. L. , & PHEYSEY, D. C. G. G. Stern's organizational climate index: a reconceptualization and application to business organizations. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 1971, 6, 77-98.

12.

PENNINGS, J. M. The relevance of the structural contingency model of organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20, 393-410.

13.

PUGH, D. S. , HICKSON, D. J. , HININGS, C. R. , & TURNER, C. Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1968, 13, 65-105.

14.

PUGH, D. S. , HICKSON, D. J. , HININGS, C. R. , & TURNER, C. The context of organization structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969, 14, 91-114.

15.

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

Market Conditions,Centralization,and Organizational Effectiveness: Contingency Theory Reconsidered

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References