Organizational participation has often been treated as a matter of securing the involvement of individuals in a more “democratic” structure. Organizational responsiveness has often been sought in increasing ease and rate of change. These parallel approaches are criticized in this paper as overreactions to a myth of autocratic organization. They give inadequate attention to formal factors which constrain or encourage participation. Both extreme individualism and extreme centralism are shown to overlook the importance of intermediate associations. Arguments based on collective goods, small group and network theories are used to show how intermediate associations could increase the effectiveness of collective participation in organizational action and the stability of organizational structure.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sociology and Political Science