Search

This paper critically examines available theoretical models which have been derived front statistically established patterns of association between contextual and organizational variables. These models offer an interpretation of organizational structure as a product of organizational structure as a product of primarily economic constraints which contextual variable are impose. It is argued that available models in fact attempt to explain organization at one remove by ignoring the essentially political process, whereby power-holders within organizations decide upon courses of strategic action. This `strategic choice' typically includes not only the establishment of structural forms but also the manipulation of environmental features and the choice of relevant performance standards. A theoretical re-orientation this kind away from functional imperatives and towards' a recognition of political action is developed and illustrated in the man body of the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the article "The Study of Organizational Effectiveness," by J. L. Price, the author surveyed strengths and weakness of two general approaches to the study of organizational effectiveness, the goal approach and the system resource approach. One of the central problem with the goal approach is the variety of goals which may be inferred from organizational behavior and the resulting ambiguity in the conceptualization of effectiveness. The meaning of organizational effectiveness in that work fluctuates widely as the analytical focus shifts between types of organizations and between levels of analysis. Organizational effectiveness appears to be a loose and ambiguous rubric under which a variety of observable outcomes of organizational behavior are listed in disarray.

This article responds to author's commentaries on the article "The Study of Organizational Effectiveness," by J. L. Price. The basis of simplistic approach rests with three assumptions supposedly made by the paper. First, the paper, according to the authors, assumes uniformity in the meanings that respondents attach to words designating core organizational activities. The paper assumes that respondents possess knowledge and competency with respect to the evaluation of nursing care within their limited spheres of involvement in the hospitals. Although, it may be desirable to have a general measure of organizational effectiveness for the reason suggested in the paper, this may not be possible. Some scholars believe that organizational effectiveness is so specific that a general measure cannot be developed.