Representing three perspectives which have guided researchers, three new measures of Centralization/Decentralization (C/D) were developed and compared with the most common C/D indicator. The findings suggest that the measures tap different aspects of C/D. In addition, C/D was found to vary by the type of decision involved. Future researchers are cautioned to avoid using different conceptualizations of C/D interchangeably.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abell, P. (Ed.). (1975). Organizations as bargaining and influence systems. London: Heineman.
2.
Blau, P.M. (1973). The organization of academic work. New York: Wiley.
3.
Blau, P.M., Falbe, C.M., McKinley, W., & Tracy, P.I. (1976). Technology and organization in manufacturing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 20-40.
4.
Carter, N.M., & Cullen, J.B. (1983). The computerization of newspaper organizations: The impact of technology on organizational structuring. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
5.
Coleman, J.S. (1974). Power and the structure of society. New York: Norton.
6.
Couch, L., & French, J.R. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations, 1, 512-533.
7.
Cullen, J.B., & Perrewé, P.L. (1981). Decision making configurations: An alternative to the centralization/decentralization conceptualization. Journal of Management, 1981, 7(2), 89-103.
8.
Dewar, R.D., Whetten, D.A., & Boje, D. (1980). An examination of the reliability and validity of the Aiken and Hage scales of centralization, formalization, and task routineness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 120-128.
9.
DuBick, M.A. (1978). The organizational structure of newspapers in relation to their metropolitan environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 418-433.
10.
Duncan, R.B. (1973). Multiple decision making structures in adapting to environmental uncertainty: The impact on organizational effectiveness. Human Relations, 26, 273-291.
11.
Gibbs, J.P., & Posten, D.L. (1975). The division of labor: Conceptualization and related measures. Social Forces, 53, 468-475.
12.
Grinyer, P.H., & Yasai-Ardekani, M. (1980). Dimensions of organizational structure: A critical replication. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 405-421.
13.
Hage, J. (1980). Theories of organizations. New York: Wiley.
14.
Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1967). Relationship of centralization to other structural properties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 72-92.
15.
Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1969). Routine technology, social structure, and organizational goals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 366-376.
16.
Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1970). Social change in complex organizations. New York: Random House.
17.
Meyer, M.W. (1979). Change in public bureaucracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., Hinings, C.R., & Turner, C. (1968). Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13, 65-106.
19.
Sales, S.M. (1966). Supervisory style and productivity: Review and theory. Personnel Psychology, 19, 275-294.
20.
Seidler, J. (1974). On using informants: A technique for collecting quantitative data and controlling measurement error in organization analysis. American Sociological Review, 39, 816-831.
21.
Simon, H.A. (1961). Administrative behavior. New York: Macmillan.
22.
Steers, R.M. (1977). Organizational effectiveness: A behavioral view. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
