Structural Correlates of Affirmative Action Compliance

Abstract

In this paper a structural-contingency model drawn from the innovation literature is applied to the particular adaptive situation created by Affirmative Action requirements. If the initiation stage activities are essential to an effective adaptation, it is argued that organic structural characteristics will be associated with success. In situations where the need for, and alternative proposals for, change are known, success will depend on the performance of adoption and implementation stage activities. Therefore, it is argued that mechanistic characteristics will be associated with success.

Affirmative Action compliance is decomposed into six behavioral dimensions, two of which require intitiation stage activities and several of which require adoption and implementation only. In general, the model is supported among a sample of small manufacturing firms. It is concluded that formalization is the predominant structural characteristic associated with Affirmative Action compliance, a result which may be generalizable to other regulatory contexts.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman, R.W. How companies respond to social demands. Harvard Business Review, 1973, 51:4, 88-98.

Baldridge, J.V. , & Burnham, R.A. Organizational innovation: Individual, organizational, and environmental impacts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20, 165-176.

Bean, A.S. , Neal, R.D. , Radnor, M. , & Tansik, D.A. Structural and behavioral correlates of implementation in U.S. business organizations. In Implementing Operations Research/Management Science, ed. R.L. Schultz & D.P. Slevin. New York: Elsevier, 1975.

Blau, P.M. , & Schoenherr, R.A. The structure of organizations. New York: Basic Books, 1971.

Burns, T. , & Stalker, G.M. The management of innovation. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961.

Child, J. Organizational structure, environment and performance The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 1972, 6, 1-22.

Corwin, R.G. Strategies for organizational innovation: An empirical comparison. American Sociological Review, 1972, 37, 441-454.

Dimick, D.E. , & Murray, V.V. Correlates of substantive policy decisions in organizations: The case of human resource management. Academy of Management Journal, 1978, 21, 601-610.

Directory of New England Manufacturers, 41st edition. Boston: George D. Hall Co., 1977.

10.

Duncan, R. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The Management of Organization Design, ed. R. Kilman , L. Pondy & D. Slevin. New York: Elsevier, 1976.

11.

Evan, W.M. , & Black, G. Innovation in business organizations: Some factors associated with success or failure of staff proposals. Journal of Business, 1967. 40, 519-530.

12.

Hage, J. An axiomatic theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1965, 10, 289-320.

13.

Hage, J. , & Aiken, Ml. Social change in complex organizations. New York: Random House, 1970.

14.

Hage, J. , & Aiken, M. Relationships of centralization to other structural properties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1967, 12, 72-92.

15.

Hage, J. , & Dewar, R.

Elite values versus organizational structure in predicting innovation

Administrative Science Quarterly, 1973, 18. 279-290.

16.

Inkson, J.H.K. , Pugh, D.S. , & Hickson, D.J. Organization context and structure: An abbreviated replication. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1970. 15, 318-329.

17.

Knight, K. A descriptive model of the intra-firm innovation process. Journal ofBusiness, 1967, 40, 478-496.

18.

Manley, J.H. Implementation attitudes: A model and a measurement methodology. In Implementing Operations Research/Management Science, ed. R. L. Schultz & D.P. Slevin. New York: Elsevier, 1975.

19.

Marino, K.E. A preliminary investigation into the behavioral dimensions of affirmative action compliance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1980, 65, 346-350.

20.

Mohr, L.B. Determinants of innovation in organizations. American Political Science Review, 1969, 63, 111-126.

21.

Negandhi, A. R.. & Prasad, S. B. Comparative e management. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1971.

22.

Pennings, J. Measures of organizational structure: A methodological note. American Journal of Sociology, 1973. 79, 686-704.

23.

Pierce, J.L. , & Delbecq, A.L. Organization structure, individual attitudes and innovation. Academy of Management Review, 1972, 2, 65-105.

24.

Pugh, D.S. , Hickson, D.J. , Hinings, C.R. , & Turner, C. Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1968, 13, 65-105.

25.

Radnor, M. , & Neal, R. The progress of management science activities in large U.S. industrial corporations. Operations Research. 1973, 21, 427-450.

26.

Reimann, B.C. On the dimensions of bureaucratic structure: An empirical re-appraisal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1973. 18, 462-476.

27.

Rogers, E. M. , & Shoemaker, F. F. Communication of innovations. New York: Free Press, 2nd ed.. 1971.

28.

Sapolsky, H.M. Organizational structure and innovation. Journal of Business, 1967, 40, 497-510.

29.

Sathe, V. Institutional versus questionnaire measures of organizational structure. Academy of Management Journal, 1978, 21, 217-238.

30.

Schein, E.H. Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1965.

31.

Shepard, H. A. Innovation-resisting and innovation-producing organizations. Journal of Business, 1967, 40, 470-477.

32.

Thompson, V. Bureaucracy and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1965, 10, 1-20.

33.

Wilson, J. Innovation in organizations: Both toward a theory. In Approaches to organizational design, ed. J.D. Thompson. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, 1966.

34.

Zaltman, G. , Duncan, R.. , & Holbeck, J. Organizations and innovation. New York. Wiley-Interscience. 1973.