ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN, PROFESSIONALIZATION, SPECIALIZATION AND INTEGRATION AS RESPONSES TO TECHNOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY: A PATH ANALYSIS EXTENSION OF THOMPSON AND GALBRAITH

摘要

This is an organizational design study. It builds most heavily on the theoretical stream developed by Thompson and Galbraith. Especially it represents an extension of the Galbraith view of an organization as an information processing system. The heart of the Galbraith work is a model that presents a sequence of organization design strategies, with alternatives, for processing information under conditions of increasing complexity.;The above theoretical constructs were analyzed and discussed at an aggregate level of organization (e.g., the firm, department or unit) but without consideration of (1) the alternatives for staffing organizations or (2) the modes of integration among those individuals on the staff. Further, the constructs were not supported by empirical research, except for examples drawn from the reanalysis of surveys and case studies previously reported in the literature.;The objective was to integrate Galbraith's model of information system design with Bell's conceptualizations of technological complexity, Volmer and Mills' concept of professionalization and a conceptualization of modes of integration and coordination, extending from Galbraith, developed by the author; then through path analysis, to see if the relationships predicted in the model were supportable. To accomplish a true test of the model, a procedure for establishing confidence limits for path coefficients was required. A procedure was developed for calculating these limits.;Path analysis techniques were applied to sample data collected from staff personnel employed by ten manufacturers located in South Georgia. The analysis was used to resolve two questions. Would technological complexity and education level explain the extent of professionalization and specialization in organization settings? Second, with professionalization and specialization included, would significant paths be found from them to modes of integration and elements of organization structure? If so, the expectation was that the resultant model would prove more useful than models which rely upon size as a major component in explaining relationships between technology and structure.;Analysis of the data shows that some of the relationships predicted in the model are invalid. Variations in professionalization and specialization were not accounted for by variations in technological complexity, when it is measured at the task level. The staffing alternatives did have significant relationships with (1) modes of integration and coordination and (2) structure. However, the significant relationships did not always occur in the manner predicted by the model.