Democracy, autocracy, and intermediate associations in organizations

Flexibility or unrestrained change?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)345-361
Number of pages17
JournalSociology
Volume14
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1980

Fingerprint

dictatorship
flexibility
democracy
participation
centralism
individualism
organizational structure
small group
myth
organization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Democracy, autocracy, and intermediate associations in organizations : Flexibility or unrestrained change? / Calhoun, Craig.

In: Sociology, Vol. 14, No. 3, 01.01.1980, p. 345-361.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6b126e2d6f0a4d4ea8efa67267b719f6,
title = "Democracy, autocracy, and intermediate associations in organizations: Flexibility or unrestrained change?",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Craig Calhoun",
year = "1980",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/003803858001400301",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "345--361",
journal = "Sociology",
issn = "0038-0385",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Democracy, autocracy, and intermediate associations in organizations

T2 - Flexibility or unrestrained change?

AU - Calhoun, Craig

PY - 1980/1/1

Y1 - 1980/1/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84965799700&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84965799700&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/003803858001400301

DO - 10.1177/003803858001400301

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 345

EP - 361

JO - Sociology

JF - Sociology

SN - 0038-0385

IS - 3

ER -