Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (18)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Davis, L. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evolving Alternative Organization Designs: Their Sociotechnical Bases

Louis E. Davis

Graduate School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024

The implicit assumptions underlying dominant or classic organization designs and the presentforces in society are examined as a background for rise of alternative organization designs. Some fourteen attributes commonly shared by the new designs are presented. These include systemic structure and roles, organizations as open systems, design by joint optimization, organizational uniqueness, stated organizational values or philosophy, quality of working life as an essential objective, comprehensive roles, selfmaintaining social units, flat structure, participation, minimal status differences, make large small, iterative evolutionary development, and minimal critical specifications. Some attributes are a response to needs for institutional survival, others for long-term economic survival, and still others for enhanced institutional effectiveness. A postscript compares evolving alternative organization designs with proposals of proponents of intermediate technology.

Human Relations, Vol. 30, No. 3, 261-273 (1977)
DOI: 10.1177/001872677703000304
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
R. Loveridge, P. Willman, and S. Deery
60 years of Human Relations
Human Relations, December 1, 2007; 60(12): 1873 - 1888.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
H. W. Gustafson and S. J. Hayden
Expert Consensus in Prioritizing and Scaling Organization Design Factors: A Case Study
Human Relations, July 1, 1985; 38(7): 665 - 681.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
W. Pasmore, C. Francis, J. Haldeman, and A. Shani
Sociotechnical Systems: A North American Reflection on Empirical Studies of the Seventies
Human Relations, December 1, 1982; 35(12): 1179 - 1204.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceHome page
G. J. Wacker
Toward a Cognitive Methodology of Organizational Assessment
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, January 1, 1981; 17(1): 114 - 129.
[PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
H. F. Kolodny and M. N. Kiggundu
Towards the Development of a Sociotechnical Systems Model in Woodlands Mechanical Harvesting
Human Relations, September 1, 1980; 33(9): 623 - 645.
[Abstract] [PDF]