Structural framework and HR framework They have a normative value because they explain how something SHOULD be. This is in contrast with the power and symbolic frameworks, which are descriptive (contemporary). The structural and HR frameworks can answer IS-questions, but mostly give answers to SHOULD-questions. For example, what should this organization look like according to the HR framework? The symbolic framework will never tell us how an organization should be run, but it gives us tools to analyze what the organization looks like.

Which frameworks are contemporary (descriptive, critical, relativism)?

Power and Symbolic The contemporary aspect of the power and symbolic framework is the fact that they are descriptive in their nature. They illustrate what something IS, and not what it SHOULD be. For example, the power framework illustrates many types of discrimination in the workplace, but it does not say what SHOULD be done to reduce it, it only describes what it looks like.

What is Weber's formal-rational bureaucracy and which framework does it belong to?

The structural framework. The model is characterized by the following principles, which are used to create functioning organizations.

What are the basic assumptions of the structural framework?

The following:

Efficiency (Internal efficiency)

The amount of resources needed to achieve something, for example working hours or amount of money.

Effectiveness (External efficiency)

How many resources are needed to produced something which is demanded. Effectiveness includes internal efficiency, but also external efficiency, which takes into account the aspect of market demand.

System efficiency

Includes both (internal) efficiency and effectiveness (external efficiency), but also adds a time or change dimension, meaning it measures how quickly an organization can adjust when demand changes.

Flow efficiency

Closely related to system efficiency, but the time factor is emphasized further. Flow efficiency is the ratio between valued-adding time (time spent working toward completing task), and lead time (time it takes from the order being placed to the customer receiving it). So, it includes both efficiency and effectiveness, but adds time factor in relation to both demand and production of the good.

Division of labor

A fundamental point in the structural framework. The work involved in producing the good is divided between different divisions. Division of labor can be based on function (production, product development, marketing), location (different countries), product (company selling small computers and large computers)

Coordination and control

Key concept in the structural framework. Coordination and control can be vertical, through superiors giving direct orders (direct control) and by setting up formal rules subordinates must follow (bureaucratic control). It can also be horizontal, meaning people on the same hierarchical level decide together on issues and what to do. Vertical is based on Weber's seven principles (structural framework), while horizontal is based on the HR framework.

A simple one-dimensional model for analyzing whether an activity is efficiently organized

Are we where we should be? Each organization should based on factors such as size and environment structure their organization differently.

Mintzberg's five configurations

(Structural framework): Machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy, simple structure, adhocracy and divisionalized form. All configurations are based on these five basic parts:

What is machine bureaucracy?

In machine bureaucracy (Mintzberg's first configuration), labor division has been taken as far as possible and coordination is entirely vertical. A strength is that it usually maximizes economies of scale, and is typically found in large corporations which mass-produce goods.

What is professional bureaucracy?

(Mintzberg's second configuration) Complex and stable. A more decentralized form of organization than in machine bureaucracy and vertical control is less extensive. Much of the organization is coordinated by the profession itself; employees in a professional bureaucracy are similar in education and background, meaning tasks are easier to coordinate and are predictable.

What is simple structure?

(Mintzberg's third configuration) Simple and turbulent. A miniature form of machine bureaucracy, with the difference that in a simple structure there are fewer hierarchical levels. They are often small businesses where the owner/founder exerts complete direct control over her employees.

What is adhocracy?

(Mintzberg's fourth configuration) Complex and turbulent. Adhocracy is coordinated by horizontal coordination and is thus the opposite of machine bureaucracy. It works well in activities such as time-limited projects and investigations.

What is divisionalized form?

(Mintzberg's fifth configuration) Divisionalized form shows that different configurations can be combined in different ways. It is found within very large companies that produce many different types of product. For example, Samsung produced both phones and fridges - perhaps different configurations work better in the production of phones compared to fridges?

Mintzberg's two-dimensional structural analysis

(Structural framework) A matrix showing how the core technology and environment of a company shows what type of configuration it is most suited to implement:

What are the basic assumptions of the HR framework?

The following: (Basically, hierarchical control and salaries are not sufficient in getting employees to perform well. There are many other ways of motivating employees through basic. human needs such as friendship and appreciation.)

How do the structural framework and HR framework describe an efficient organization differently?

In the following way:

Maslow's hierarchy of needs

In management context, Maslow's hierarchy can be interpreted in the way that unless employee's lower needs are fulfilled, their motivation will not be increased by their higher levels being fulfilled. It does not matter how much appreciation an employee is given, if the salary is way too low.

Herzberg's two-factor theory of motivation

(HR framework) This model is much like Maslow's, with Herzberg dividing people's needs into two groups: hygiene factors and motivators. Hygiene factors remove dissatisfaction: job security, salary and benefits, leadership style. These are external aspects of work and correspond to the lower levels of Maslow's model. Motivators create positive feelings and commitments: personal development, attention etc. These are internal aspects of work and correspond to the higher levels of Maslow's model. The Herzberg two-factor theory of motivation can also be illustrated in a matrix:

Internal vs external commitment

(HR framework) When commitment is internal, individuals define their own tasks and the behaviour to complete the task is also defined by the individuals herself. External commitment is when tasks are defined by other and the goals and execution to reach these goals are decided by management.

Espoused theories vs theories in use

(HR framework) Espoused theory is what we say we act upon, but we don't necessarily actually do. Theories in use is what we in reality are doing, but don't necessarily say we are doing.

Single-loop learning vs double-loop learning

(HR framework) Single-loop learning is self-protective and self-reinforcing learning, while double-loop learning challenges us and allows us to reframe during our learning and breaking perspectives.

Model 1 and 2 communication

(HR framework) Model 1 communication is much like vertical control as it is much about persuasion and giving orders. In model 1 the individual does her own analysis and tries to persuade others through facts and logic. Model 2 communication is similar to horizontal control, where the individual tries to find common ground with her co-workers and instead of persuading, tries to understand other perspectives and potentially change her own opinion.

Theory X vs theory Y

(HR framework) Theory X assumes that people are lazy and the only way to get them to perform is to motivate them with an external factor (carrot) such as money, and to use strict control (the whip). This belief easily becomes self-fulfilling, as people under strict control tend to resist it, leading to managers trying to implement even more control. Theory Y assumes that "work is as natural as play is for children". The theory aligns with the HR framework and says that if employees are given sufficient prerequisites to satisfy their higher needs (Maslow), they will want to work and perform. This theory can also become self-fulfilling, as the goals of the employees will merge with the organization if they are given influence over their work.

Emotional intelligence

(HR framework) EQ can be said to be both a complement and criticism of IQ. It is viewed as perhaps the most important skill of leaders, and aligns well with the beliefs of the HR framework. Although genetic to an extent, EQ can be trained by practicing the following aspects: Self-awareness Self-regulation Social skills Empathy Motivation

Job characteristic model (Hackman & Oldham)

(HR framework) According to the job characteristic model, workplaces and tasks should be designed accordingly with three points: 1. Each employee should feel their work is meaningful. 2. Each employee should feel responsible for their work. 3. Each employee should be able to see how their work contributes to the organization To achieve this, the business must be designed in accordance with five basic features (another flashcard as there was not sufficient space)

Job characteristic model's five basic features

(HR framework) 1. Skill variety (employees able to use different skills at different steps of the production process. 2. Task identity (tasks are designed so employees can identify with them). 3. Task significance (The importance of the work in larger context must be conveyed to the employees, for example a positive effect on climate change). 4. Autonomy (The work by the employee is designed by herself and no one else, she decides where and when to solve the task). 5. Feedback (The employee receives constructive feedback on their work) The result is that employees feel high internal motivation in a workplace with these features, leading to fewer sick days and overall a more profitable business.

Critique of the HR framework

It is not necessarily correct that the higher commitment levels which the HR framework tries to achieve, results in a higher performance of the employees. The structural framework, which is in contrast to the HR framework often, has a point in the fact that many businesses succeed even though they have vertical control. It is also possible that the high commitment of employees within the HR framework is due to the fact that the organization is already performing well. For example, it is easier to stay committed when you play for a good football team than a bad one.

The four assumptions of the power framework

The following:

Which framework is the power framework in very stark contrast to, and why?

The power framework is in stark contrast to the HR framework. The HR framework believes conflicts and issues can be resolved by conversation and discussion, while the power framework states that conflict will always be present and can not be solved, only managed to an extent.

In what way is the power framework in ideological opposition to the other frameworks?

The power framework describes how certain groups have much higher levels of power than others. The other frameworks do not describe these power relationships, which becomes problematic when for example looking at the scarcity of women and minorities in top positions. The power framework gives logical explanations to why, namely that women and minorities are actively discriminated and thus have a harder time acquiring power.

Lukes' three dimensions of power

(Power framework) 1. Decision-making power: An individual can strictly decide over what another individual does. "A has power over B to the extent that A can make B do anything that B would not otherwise have done". This dimension is visible and thus easier to analyze. 2. Agenda-setting power: The power to control what is and what is not on the agenda. If you are able to control the context of decision-making, you can influence much more than one decision. 3. Manipulation: Manipulation is power over another person's thoughts, being able to control what they think and how they perceive different things, including themselves. Because manipulation is a more invisible dimension of power, it is also more difficult to analyze.

Pfeffer's model of conflict and power struggle

(Power framework) The picture shows why there will always be conflict, in accordance with the power framework. Pfeffer's model has three strategies for managing conflicts: 1. Create a surplus of resources: Reduces scarcity leading to less conflicts , for example more profitable companies have less conflicts. The downside is that this is costly. 2. Create homogeneity and consensus on goals and means: Although people can never fully agree in the power framework, the can disagree more or less. A consensus of goals and means will reduce conflict, but at the expense of flexibility. 3. Reduce and downplay the significance of decisions: Difficult questions can be divided into smaller ones or avoided altogether, however upon realization this can lead to more conflict

Power bases

(Power framework) Power bases are the sources of power an actor has in a certain issue, for example control of rewards, personal power, coercive power etc. These are important to analyze in order to understand how actors can influence other to perform or refrain from a certain action.

The two established negotiation models

(Power framework) 1. Ury, Fisher and Patton's model for "principled negotiation" 2. Cialdini's six principles for persuasion (The content of these models are in other flashcards)

Principled negotiation - getting to yes (Ury et al.)

(Power framework) The model's goal is to negotiate in an effective manner by avoiding compromising more than necessary. A principled negotiation is characterized by: 1. Separate people from the problem: You should try to combine soft and hard negotiation strategies, by being soft on people and hard on problems. 2. Focus on the counterpart's interests: Identifying and speaking about the other person's interests reduces the risk of the opponent seeing themselves as an opponent. 3. Generate more options: Trying to generate more options might result in a situation where both parties think they have won, instead if a win-lose situation. 4. Refer to "objective" evaluation criteria: If you agree on a joint evaluation process based on "objective" criteria, you can refer to this when conveying your point.

Cialdini's six principles of persuasion

(Power framework) 1. Liking principle: People are more affected by those they like. In a negotiation situation you should therefore try to identify similarities between the parties. 2. Authority principle: People are affected more by those they perceive have a lot of authority. Conveying your authority, like a doctor hanging up their certificate, can thus help you with persuasion. 3. Scarcity principle: The scarcer the resource, the more attractive. As a negotiator you should try to describe your solution as unique, as a scarce resource. 4. Consistency principle: If you make an initial decision it is far more likely you will stand by this if you write it down or express it publicly. 5. Reciprocity principle: People give back what you give to them, which applies to attention, respect etc. 6. Principle of social proof: By pointing out how other people/companies etc have acted in similar situations, you increase the chance of the counterpart to agree.

Basic assumptions of the symbolic framework

1. All people are unique: No two people perceive the world exactly the same. 2. Norms and cultures reduce uncertainty: Uncertainty is managed by humans creating norms and cultures to conform to and live by. 3. Norms and cultures are created and reproduced through everything we do: Through our thoughts, actions, artifacts etc we express and interpret our culture. 4. The meaning and interpretation of things are more important than the things themselves: We can never obtain truly objective knowledge, thus our interpretations of things are what matters for what we do. 5. Management, organization, and leadership are about creating meaning and interpretations: Through symbolic leadership we can get actors to make specific interpretations.

Schein's three levels of organizational culture

(Symbolic framework) Schein defines organizational culture as a pattern of shared basic assumption within the organization, and divides culture into three levels: 1. Artifacts: Physical objects, logos, managers flying business class etc. Easily observable things, but which are meaningless in themselves. 2. Espoused values: All manner of explicit value statements such as a company's mission statement or their core values. These points have to be interpreted, not only observed. 3. Basic assumptions: Make up the essence of the organizational culture and invisible and subconscious, for example human nature, us and them etc. Thus more difficult to analyze

Two approaches to organizational culture

(Symbolic framework) 1. As a tool to manage organizations; organizations have cultures 2. As an explanation for why organizations exist and look the way they do; organizations are expressions of cultures

Schein's five dimensions for describing basic assumptions

(Symbolic framework) Basic assumptions make up the essence of the organizational culture and is invisible/subconscious according to Schein's three levels of organizational culture 1. Us and them: If an employee is a "good organization member", that implies there are bad ones - who are they? 2. Human nature: How do we view the nature of human beings? For example theory X vs theory Y. 3. Time and space: What is short run and what is long run? 4. Work and leisure: Kept separate? Kept balanced? 5. Feminine and masculine: Is the organization, from a stereotypical perpsective, feminine or masculine?

Hofstede's six dimensions for describing culture

(Symbolic framework) The model describes what distinguishes cultures of groups: 1. Power distance: How do people with little power relate to those with much power? Sweden has lower power distance than many other countries. 2. Individualism vs collectivism: Is the culture individualistic or collectivistic? Sweden is one of the most individualistic countries in the world. 3. Femininity vs masculinity: Does the culture have more feminine or masculine values? Note that this is clearly stereotypical and very controversial. 4. Uncertainty avoidance: The extent to which the members feel uncomfortable with uncertainty. Cultures with a lot of uncertainty avoidance try to standardize the behaviour of its individuals. 5. Long-term vs short-term orientation: Cultures with long-term orientation are pragmatic, while those with short-term have a historical and more normative perspective. 6. Indulgence vs restraint: Expression of emotions and gratification or not?

Groupthink symptoms (Janis)

(Symbolic framework) According to Janis' model groups composed of highly skilled members sometimes make insane decisions because of groupthink. The symptoms of groupthink are divided into three groups: 1. Overestimation of the group: An unquestionable belief in the group and that it is completely efficient. 2. Closed-mindedness: Members rationalize and explain away warning signs that the group is wrong. 3. Illusion of unanimity: Groupthink puts pressure on members to appear uniform and equal, making members who questions things seem disloyal to the group.

Groupthink is more likely to arise in groups where the following three conditions are fulfilled (Janis)

(Symbolic framework) 1. High group cohesion: Group members feel it is more important to belong to the group than to express their individual thoughts. 2. Structural shortcomings: When the group is isolated and the backgrounds of its members are homogenous, like at SSE. 3. Pressing external conditions: Decisions made under stress or in a threatening situation increases the risk of groupthink.

Remedies to avoid groupthink (Janis)

(Symbolic framework) 1. Critical evaluators and being able to openly air doubts of the situation at hand. 2. Evaluators with an outside perspective on the situation. 3. Before a decision is made, a final second chance meeting should be held, where any doubts can be conveyed.

Leadership according to the symbolic framework

1. Charismatic leadership: Humans are shaped by their social experiences and relations, meaning charisma is not static and can be improved. 2. Transformative leadership: Leadership that causes employees to want to achieve goals beyond their own self-realization. 3. Symbolic leadership: Influencing how others interpret and experience their surroundings and themselves, by for example telling compelling stories or using symbols to get attention

The three cornerstones of rhetoric (Aristotle)

1. Ethos (personality, charm) 2. Logos (reason and logical arguments) 3. Pathos (emotional expression)

How can we relate what Carly Fiorina did at HP to this course in Management and organization?

When beginning her position at HP, the company had a high-commitment culture. The so called "HP way" was characterized by progressive management ideas, focus on teamwork, and profits over revenue growth - "profits and people". By the early 2000's, the high commitment culture was gone and the company was now run in a far more hierarchical fashion than before, with classic vertical coordination. What is obvious is that Fiorina changed the company culture from being inspired by the HR framework, to the structural framework. This is evident in how she introduced incentive-based pay, which is a great example of Theory X vs Y, where the first believes employees has to be motivated by a "carrot", in is heavily opposed by the HR framework.

How management views its employees (Hansson)

(HR framework) Management can either view their employees as actors (Co-creators of the product, internal commitment, theory Y) or as recipients (performers of defined tasks, theory X). Management's view of employees affect their choice of competence strategies (four pure competence strategies)

Four pure competence strategies (Hansson)

(HR framework) Hansson has created a matrix of how an organization should be run based on the way they view employees and their view on business development. Employees can either be regarded as actors, co-creators of the final product, or as recipients, whose tasks are defined by management. Regarding employees as actors is in line with theory Y, as employees are internally motivated, while the recipient-perspective suggests employees need to be externally motivated to perform (theory X). A company which is customer-driven has the ultimate goal of fulfilling the needs of their customers adequately, for example McDonald's. For obvious reasons, this coincides much with machine bureaucracy. A company which is competence-driven reflects on what it can develop in its delivery in order to create new markets. The difference between customer-driven and competence-driven business development can be said to be that customer-driven tries to supply current demand, while competence-driven tries to create new demand. Moulding: Employees are recipients and business development is customer-driven. They are adapted to a certain strategy and task, the company's focus is on economies of scale. Moulding does not work in turbulent environments where adaptability is key. (theory X) Buying: Recipients and competence-driven. Companies recruit specific people for specific roles, which are usually more complex. Over the last 20 years, companies have become smaller, with much of their work outsourced to consultants, and example of buying. (theory X) Matching: Customer-driven, employees are actors. A combination of satisfying customer needs and taking into account the ambitions of the employees. Create close bond between employees, customers, and management. Matching corresponds to Zappos view of employees and business development. Challenging: The pure competence strategy which is most in line with the HR framework. The employees are the most fundamental part of the business, co-creators.

Decision rationality, action rationality, and organisational hypocrisy (Brunsson)

(Symbolic framework) Can be compared with Janis' theory of groupthink Decision rationality: One clear goal/problem. Much information and different alternatives which can be analysed. According to theory, can lead to paralysis. Action rationality: Acting on issue without too much analysis (do as has been done before). Can be triggered by artifact (remember the people lost in the mountain) Organisational hypocrisy: The organisation does not act accordingly with their own guidelines (much like espoused theories vs. theories in use). Can be good as it increases organisation's room for maneuvering - especially important when opinions are divided.

An organisation's five growth phases (Greiner)

(Advanced structural framework) An organisation goes through five phases and five crises in-between. 1. Creativity (similar to adhocratic structural configuration) leads to leadership-crisis. 2. Direction. Organisation develops toward machine bureaucracy to get clear leadership, leading to crisis of lack of autonomy. Many skilled employees leave. 3. Delegation/Decentralisation: Move away from vertical control and toward Mintzberg's divisionalized form. Lack of control-crisis appears. 4. Coordination. Does not mean more vertical control, but more sophisticated processes. Organisation eventually becomes too large for regular structures, manifested by distrust between divisions etc (red-tape bureaucracy) 5. Collaboration. More action-oriented operations. Last crisis: mental health of employees When analyzing a case from the structural perspective, Greiner's model can be used to understand in what phase the company is, and how it thus should be structured (for example in accordance with Mintzberg's structural configurations)

Uncertainty in the environment - PESTEL

(Advanced structural framework) A model which can be used to analyze the environment: Political Economic Social Technological Environmental Legal

Lean production

(Advanced structural framework) - Minimizing the time it takes to satisfy customer demand e.g. creating product only when it has been purchased. "Just in time". - Results in minimal inventory and high flow efficiency. Lean makes it easier to identify problematic parts of production. When it occurs, the "assembly line" is stopped, in order to identify the issue and thus creating better flow. - Instead of a traditional structural model where a line breakdown is a disaster and reserves are thus needed, the lean perspective suggests disrupting production to identify issues.

The waterfall model

(Advanced structural framework) The structural perspective of projects: Decision-rationality and a limited amount of resources and time in order to finish product. Everything must be planned and analyzed before production begins. One issue is that in practice it is impossible to plan away all uncertainties, meaning waterfall model can result in action-paralysis (action-rationality vs decision-rationality symbolic framework)

Stage/toll-gate model

(Advanced structural framework) A model where continuous toll-gates are performed, meaning continuously checking the quality of work performed in order to identify adjustments needed. Because of this, it is practically more realistic than the waterfall model. Certain sub-goals are created within production. When the necessary work of the first one has been completed, a toll-gate is performed. If the work is sufficiently good, the group moves forward to the next subgoal.

Strengths and weaknesses of structural framework

(Advanced structural framework) See pages 90-92

SDT model (Self-determination theory)

(Advanced HR framework) A more nuanced perspective of motivation. There are two extremes: pure extrinsic motivation and pure intrinsic motivation. In practice, almost all people are somewhere in-between. One interpretation is that employees can be very motivated to perform, even if it's not because of intrinsic motivators. However, striving toward intrinsically-motivated employees can be better long-run. Pure intrinsic motivation will almost always be impossible though. Tony Hsieh (rip) put a lot of trust in his employees being intrinsically motivated when he reorganized Zappos. The fact that many employees were extrinsically motivated resulted in many leaving when extrinsic motivators such as hierarchical structures disappeared. (This is an interpretation)

Agile projects

(Advanced HR framework) In contrast with the waterfall model where everything is planned from start to finish (Structural framework), the agile model is more in resemblance with the basic assumptions and principles of the HR framework. Agile projects are suited for development of new and constantly improving systems. To relate this to Mintzberg's structural configurations (structural framework), this means that different configurations should be employed at different times. This is one similarity between the structural and HR frameworks; the structural framework supplies a description of different configurations which then according to the HR framework can be applicable in different situations as per the lean model.

Generic questions based on an HR framework

Generic questions based on the HR framework

(Advanced HR framework)

Strengths of the HR framework

(Advanced HR framework) - Complements the structural framework's weaknesses, as the HR framework focuses on the psychological aspects of people, while the structural focuses on the rational (homo economicus). The differences between these can be seen as strengths. HR and structural both complement and contradict each other. As a complement, HR framework gives the structural business a more human view, and as a criticism, it produces conclusions which help us re-frame reality more in depth.

Weaknesses of the HR framework

(Advanced HR framework) - Sheds light on some aspects of reality but shields it from others. The structural and HR frameworks can be said to be naive, because they take more things for granted than the power and symbolic frameworks. The HR framework can be said to believe too much in the good in people, while the structural framework believes in the rationality of people. - "Romanticised" picture of reality with no conflicts. Lack of analysis of influence, power and conflict. - Is it realistic that people actually are intrinsically motivated to the extent the HR framework believes? - A weakness of the HR framework is a strength of the power framework: HR helps conceal the aspect of influence which the power framework illuminates. - It is an assumed empirical evidence that motivated employees result in a successful organization, could be the other way around.

Kanter's structural explanation of power and influence (minorities and tokens)

(Advanced power framework) Kanter found that in many companies, women are either a minority or alone (a token), which has consequences for how both the majority and minority acts. 1. A minority/token receives a lot of (negative) attention: When a man performs badly, it's because he himself is bad. When a woman performs badly, it's because women are bad. 2. There is a contrast between minorities and majorities: The majority reinforces their structures when a token is implemented. A macho culture filled with men becomes even more macho when a token woman is introduced. 3. A token either assimilates or distances themselves: For example, a woman assimilates to macho structures in order to be accepted, showing "loyalty" by distancing herself from other women. This illustrates how increased assimilation can lead to less equality --> Assimilation effect (one woman "protects" the majority (men) from other women in the group. Recruitment of a token woman can thus lead to more inequality (HR would suggest going toward meritocracy is good, but power framework suggests that if it results in token individuals, less meritocracy can be the result.) Gender theory: Token men don't face glass ceilings, they are helped by "glass elevators". Why is this? We need knowledge of norms and patriarchal structures to fully understand, but can be supplemented by Kanter.

Weber's three types of legitimate authority

(Advanced power framework) Weber defines authority as power which people accept. Types of authority: 1. Charismatic authority: Based on personal qualities of the leader. Often the case with start-ups, people allow themselves to be governed because of the charisma of the leader. One issue is that of the leader loses his/her charisma, they also lose their entire authority, and the governing style will likely move toward formal-rational. 2. Traditional authority: The authority comes from the fact that the leading style has been perpetuated for an extensive time period. According to Weber, traditional authority can cement inequality, as it does not allow for a meritocracy. 3. Formal-rational authority: According to Weber the most developed and civilized type of authority. The authority is not based on traditions nor charismatic abilities, but on the positions which individuals hold in a hierarchical structure. With every position comes an associated authority. In a functioning formal-rational structure, this means a meritocracy is possible to achieve. Interesting point: Weber felt that although formal-rational authority was preferable, it contributed to an extensive rationalization of everything in society, which he ultimately believed results in life being drained of its meaning.

Michels' theory of the iron law of oligarchy

(Advanced power framework) Michels formulated a very harsh criticism of bureaucracy, where he said that instead of bureaucracies being meritocratic structures, they are undemocratic and continuously enable for "oligarchies". In these, the elite in each respective oligarchy belong to the same social circles. When it for example comes to trade unions, their prominent leaders hang out with business leaders, although their job is to protect workers' rights from being exploited by business leaders. Thus, companies and organizations are never truly competitors, as the senior management are friends with each other. Michels therefore believed that Weber's belief in meritocracy was naive. He also mentions a societal perspective, namely that women and minorities never gain access to the higher echelons of the organization structures.

Acker's theory of bureaucratic control and society's gender systems

(Advanced power framework) Acker is like Michels also pessimistic of Weber's belief in formal-rational authority being the fairest way of leadership. He thinks that the continuous rationalization of organizations results in increased inequality, and that no room for people's emotions or beliefs exist in organizations where rationalization has been taken far. He says that the formalization has resulted in businesses being designed for men to succceed in, but only through the assistance of women outside of work. This means that the only way for a male to succeed, is given that he has a wife who takes care of the home and children. Because a prerequisite to succeed in organizations which are male in their nature is for women to be distanced, this means female working conditions are worsened. Thus, Acker's theories have an explanatory value for gender norms and discrimination.

Burawoy labor process theory - manufacturing consent

(Advanced power framework) Much like Acker's and Michels' theories, Burawoy is critical of the way certain organizations are structured. While Michels focuses on the higher parts of the organizational structure (senior managers), Burawoy focuses on the lower parts, the workers. He believes companies are able to exert power over their employees because the employees have accepted the capitalistic order which rules over them. By splitting employees up from collectives to individual people and assessing them personally, through for example incentive-based pay, the workers give up their influence.

Foucault's theory of structuring and self-discipline

(Advanced power framework) Much like Weber, Acker, Michels, and Burawoy, describes how organizations over time has become more and more structured. But the important difference between Foucault's beliefs and the aforementioned, is that he believes that it is not a certain group in society which exerts power over others, but rather every single individual who disciplines themselves. This can be likened to Burawoy's theory, where workers have simply accepted to be ruled by capitalistic structures. The difference is that Foucault believes even senior managers and CEOs are victims of structures which they have had to accept. For example, even if you are a management consultant earning a lot of money, the 80 hours per week you are working are more so benefitting actors which are higher up in the hierarchical structure than you are.

Maccoby's Freud-based leader types

(Advanced power framework) Maccoby's theory of leader types is a warning of the admiration given to certain types of leaders. He has divided leader types into three categories based on Freud's analysis of character types: 1. The erotic leader is what the HR framework suggests is the ideal leader. He or she creates strong emotional bonds with their coworkers and is often a celebrated ideal of how a leader should be. Can be found in healthcare and in schools. 2. The obsessive leader is structured and introverted. A productive obsessive leader can be said to be the ideal leader according to the structural framework. He or she is not a risk-taker, but is systematic in their way of thinking. Can be found in e.g. accounting and business planning. 3. The narcissistic leader is Maccoby's main point of investigation. He or she is a big risk-taker and does not want to make friends, they want to be admired. They constantly have their guard up and thinks of coworkers as enemies. Strengths and weaknesses: Maccoby believes erotic leaders' need for emotional connections make them bad leaders. Obsessive leaders are good leaders as they are calculating and do not take many risks. However, it is the narcissistic leader which often is held as a high ideal, because they are visionaries and great leaders when there is high uncertainty and others are paralyzed. However, they are bad team members and often disliked by others.

Generic questions and strengths and weaknesses of power framework

(Advanced power framework) Unlike the HR and structural framework, the power framework does not offer any explanation for what the optimal organization looks like. Rather, it answers many IS-questions, giving us descriptive tools for analyzing structures. It does however not suggest what we should do or how we should act. Strengths of power framework: It is a criticism of the HR and structural frameworks, which are both normative in describing what an organization should look like. It criticises the extensive formal-rationality of the structural framework, and the conflict-free world of the HR framework. Weaknesses of power framework: The power framework has many logical inconsistencies. Sometimes the individual is described as a cold and calculating person who exerts power to gain influence, while she other times is described as a victim of societal structures. The HR framework can be said to be idealistic in its view of human beings wanting to be intrinsically motivated. In the same way, the power framework can be said to be cynical in its assumptions of people being power-driven.

Weick's seven properties of sensemaking (micro perspective)

(Advanced symbolic framework) Weick argues that individuals' sensemaking, their way of interpreting stimuli, has seven distinct aspects: Sensemaking is based on: 1. Identity: The identity of the individual will affect the way they respond to stimuli. If you are an A-student and fail a test, it might challenge your identity. One way of sensemaking is then to convince yourself that the grading was done poorly. 2. Retrospective: Sensemaking being retrospective means that when we are faced with stimuli, much of how we act is based on things in retrospect. What has happened when we have been in similar situations and how we handled those situations. 3. Enacting: Sensemaking is an active process based on and produces both stimuli and action. 4. Social: Sensemaking always involves other people. Even if just looking at artifacts, they are considered a media for human interaction. 5. Constantly ongoing: Sensemaking occurs continuously. 6. Based on cues: Noticing a snake and becoming afraid. In everyday life, body language etc. 7. Strives for plausibility over accuracy: We can never be entirely sure of the things we try to make sense of. E.g example with soldiers stuck on mountain, they valued the plausibility of the map being correct and following it rather than its actual accuracy.

Weick's pulsating organizational model (meso perspective)

(Advanced symbolic framework) Based on Weick's seven properties of sensemaking, he created the pulsating organizational model. It says that all groups which work together will gradually become more specialized and divide labor. Group members continuously learn from one another and and take on complementary roles. After some time the individuals develop certain nischs and labor becomes divided, in accordance with the structural framework. However, this will also lead to many differences in opinion. The differences in opinion ultimately result in group members beginning to interact with each other again, more in accordance with the HR framework. Weick's pulsating organizational model illustrates how an organization is never in a stable mode, but rather "pulsates" back and forward from structural ideals to HR ideals.

Institutional vs technical environments

(Advanced symbolic framework) Environments can either be institutional or technical. Institutional environments are characterized by high uncertainty regarding how different strategies and organizational structures are related to efficiency, while technical environments are characterized by the fact that organizations are under high pressure to deliver goods efficiently. All organizations operate in both institutional and technical environments. Strong institutional and weak technical: Churches Strong institutional and strong technical: Public service Weak institutional and weak technical: Preschools Weak institutional and strong technical: Manufacturing industry

Final in-depth examination of symbolic leadership

(Advanced symbolic framework) Symbolic leadership can be likened with manipulation in certain aspects. Although inspring leadership is seen as something positive, it can also be interpreted as power over thought. Here, a link with the power framework can be made, as one of Lukes' three power dimensions is manipulation.

Generic questions of the symbolic framework

(Advanced symbolic framework) The symbolic framework has the least assumptions of human nature of the four frameworks. Like the power framework, it is therefore more difficult to make normative conclusions, as to what an organization SHOULD do. The symbolic framework is however not necessarily in conflict with the normative frameworks, as it can give us important interpretations of our surroundings which can then be used in multi-frame analysis.

Strengths and weaknesses of the symbolic framework

(Advanced symbolic framework) Strengths: - The framework becomes more flexible as it does not make extensive assumptions of human nature, like the HR framework. It also means it has few logical inconsistencies such as the power framework. Weaknesses: - Because much of the symbolic framework is related to more abstract things such as sensemaking, it can be difficult to make precise analyses.

Dimensions and situational dependencies (Mintzberg)

(Structural framework) Mintzberg's structural configurations can be used to analyze which configuration the company resembles, while the situational dependencies analyzes which configuration it SHOULD resemble, according to certain factors. 1. Size and age: The bigger the organization, the more structure and vertical control it is going to need. The age of the organization is also relevant, because older organizations generally know how processes should be carried out. 2. Central processes and core technology: The higher the complexity, the lower the formalization we should have. For example with R&D, we should have a decentralized structure. 3. Environment: The higher the turbulence and uncertainty, the less formalization should be implemented. 4. Strategy: The higher the quality of technical activity, the less formalization. A high-end restaurant should not be structured the same as a McDonald's. 5. Information technology(storing and manipulating data): IT can make an organization more horizontally coordinated. This is because IT can make teams behave more independently. At the same time, IT allows for upper management to achieve a higher level of control than before, allowing for more vertical control. 6. Labor force: The more skilled the labor force, the more decentralized should the organization be, meaning less hierarchical structures and formalization.

What is a good structural leader?

(Advanced structural framework) 1. Obsessive leader (Power framework) 2. Meritocracy (weber's formal rational authority)

Williamson's transaction theory and industrial network approach

(Advanced structural framework) Williamson's transaction theory: Will we produce something ourselves, or will we purchase it from elsewhere? If products are homogenous, sellers can not lie. This means that there is a low transactional cost because information gathering is cheaper. Homogenous products will thus be bought in the market. Heterogenous products should be produced by yourself, as the information gathering needed to know whom to purchase from. Industrial network approach: All products are heterogenous in some way. A Toyota is different from a Ford, meaning that when purchasing a car we will want to create a bond. Creating the bond will mean a high transaction cost, but after establishing the bond, transaction costs will decrease dramatically.

Nonaka and Takeuchi's model for the creation of organizational knowledge

(Advanced HR framework)

Phases in team development (Wheelan)

(Advanced HR framework) Phases when developing a team: 1. Dependency and inclusion(forming): Goals are roles are unclear, leader is idealised, members feel dependent on leader. Need to develop psychological safety and structure. 2. Counter-dependency and fight(storming): Group members challenge the leader, members feel frustrated, subgroups are formed. Need to solve conflicts by emphasizing common goals and shared value. 3. Trust and structure(norming): Roles and tasks are more clearly defined and the group members accept their roles in the group. Satisfaction has increased. Need to continuously develop and use feedback. 4. Work and productivity (high-performing team) (performing): Clear and shared goals, responsibilities are delegated and people know and like their roles. Need to maintain these structures. 5. The group "dies".