Organizational research is less divided along micro and macro lines than is often assumed. This article addresses the developments made in bridging micro and macro organizational research over the past 30 years, in particular, the mainstreaming of multilevel organizational thinking as standard practice. Related developments include the multilevel heuristics commonly used in the field’s research designs as well as its theory and research regarding self-organizing multilevel processes and cross-level interventions. Advocating integrative pluralism, this article then recommends three approaches to expanding and deepening micro/macro integration, including active use of alternative representations in research, systematic reviews that integrate findings across levels, and computer simulations modeling cross-level complexity.
Aguinis, H., Beaty, J.C., Boik, R.J., & Pierce, C.A.2005. Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 94-107.
Bartunek, J.M.1984. Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly , 29: 355-372.
4.
Bhaskar, R.1998. The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Routlege.
5.
Bikhchandani, S., Lawrence, B., Longstaff, F., & Scott, C.2006. Report of the Gender Equity Committee. Los Angeles: The Anderson School UCLA.
6.
Burton, R.M.2003. Computational laboratories for organization science: Questions, validity and docking. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 9: 91-108.
7.
Burton, R.M., & Obel, B.1980. A computer simulation test of the M-form hypothesis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 457-466.
8.
DiMaggio, P.1991. The macro-micro dilemma in organizational research: Implications of role-system theory. In J. Huber (Ed.), Macro-micro linkages in Sociology: 76-98. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9.
Eisenhardt, K.1989. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14: 57-74.
10.
Feldman, M.S., & Pentland, B.T.2003. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as sources of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 94-118.
11.
Fichman, M.2010, April 2. Learning the rules in the "National Research League"-Reflections on methodological training in organizational research . Presentation at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
12.
Gersick, C.J.G.1988. Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 9-41.
Granovetter, M.1985. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness . American Journal of Sociology, 91: 481-510.
15.
Hackman, J.R.1980. Groups at work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
Hackman, J.R.2003. Learning more by crossing levels: Evidence from airplanes, hospitals, and orchestras. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 24: 905-922.
17.
Herman, J.B., & Hulin, C.L.1972. Studying organizational attitudes from individual and organizational frames of reference. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 18: 84-108.
18.
Hofmann, D.A., Griffin, M.A., & Gavin, M.B.2000. The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research and methods in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19.
House, R., Rousseau, D.M., & Thomas, M.1995. MESO: An integration of macro and micro OB. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 17: 71-114. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
20.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R.1966/1978. Social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
21.
Khurana, R.2007. From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
Klein, K. J., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (Eds.). 2000. Multilevel theory, research and methods in organizations. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
23.
Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Klein, K.J.2000. A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations . In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research and methods in organization: 3-90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24.
Lord, R.G., & Hanges, P.J.1987. A control system model of organizational motivational: Theoretical development applied implications. Behavioral Science , 32: 161-178.
25.
Mitchell, S.D.2009. Unsimple truths: Science, complexity, and policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
O’Reilly, C.A., & Roberts, K.H.1975. Individual differences in personality, position in the organization, and job satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 14: 144-150.
27.
Pearce, J.L.2001. Organization and management in the embrace of government . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
Ramanujam, R.2003. The effects of discontinuous change on latent errors in organizations: The moderating role of risk. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 608-617.
29.
Raudenbach, S.W., & Bryk, A.S.2002. Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
30.
Reif, F.2008. Applying cognitive science to education: Thinking and learning in scientific and other complex domains. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31.
Roberts, K.H., Hulin, C.L., & Rousseau, D.M.1978. Developing an interdisciplinary science of organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32.
Rodgers, J.L.2010. The epistemology of mathematical and statistical modeling: A quiet methodological revolution. American Psychologist, 65: 1-10.
33.
Rousseau, D.M.1977. Technological differences in job characteristics, employee satisfaction, and motivation: A synthesis of job design research and sociotechnical systems theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 19: 18-42.
34.
Rousseau, D.M.1978a. Characteristics of departments, positions, and individuals: Contexts for attitudes and behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23: 521-540.
35.
Rousseau, D.M.1978b. Measures of technology as predictors of employee attitudes . Journal of Applied Psychology, 63: 213-218.
36.
Rousseau, D.M.2005. I-deals: Idiosyncratic deals employees bargain for themselves . Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
37.
Rousseau, D.M., & Boudreau, J.W. in press. Sticky evidence: Research findings practitioners find useful. In E. E. Lawler & S. A. Mohrman (Eds.), Useful Research 25 years later. San Francisco: Berrett Koehler.
38.
Rousseau, D.M., Manning, J., & Denyer, D.2008. Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through reflective reviews . Annals of the Academy of Management, 2: 475-515.
39.
Schneider, B.1987. The people make the place. Personnel Psychology , 40: 437-453.
40.
Shenkar, O., & von Glinow, M.A.1994. Paradoxes of organizational theory and research: Using the case of China to illustrate national contingency . Management Science, 40: 56-71.
41.
Simon, H.A.1996. Sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
Uzzi, B.1997. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly , 42: 35-67.
44.
Valian, V.1999. Why so slow: The advancement of women. Boston: MIT Press.
45.
Vroom, V.1964. Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
46.
Waldman, D.A., & Yammarino, F.J.1999. CEO charismatic leadership: Levels-of-management and levels-of-analysis effects. Academy of Management Review, 24: 266-85.
47.
Weick, K.E.1982. Management of organizational change among loosely coupled elements. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Change in organizations: 375-408. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48.
Weick, K.E.1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49.
Whetten, D.A.2002. Modeling-as-theorizing: A systematic methodology for theory development. In D. Partington (Ed.), Essential skills for management research: 45-71. London : Sage.
