Organizational analysis and design theories: a review on contingent assumptions and strategic co-aligment

Teorías del análisis y diseño organizacional: una revisión a los postulados contingentes y de la co-alineación estratégica;
Teorías da análise e do desenho organizacional: uma revisão dos postulados contingentes e do coalinhamento estratégico

dc.creatorMarín-Idárraga, Diego Armando
dc.creatorCuartas-Marín, Juan Carlos
dc.date2013-12-31
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-15T18:17:49Z
dc.date.available2022-12-15T18:17:49Z
dc.identifierhttps://revistas.unimilitar.edu.co/index.php/rfce/article/view/645
dc.identifier10.18359/rfce.645
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/5356321
dc.descriptionThis article reviews structural contingency and strategic co-alignment theories, which comprise two core perspectives in analysis field and organizational design. It is concluded that the systemic theory exceeded classic conception of insular and closed organization, emerging several current research considering the environment as one of the incident variables in organizational processes, including the so-called adjustment theories, which explain the organization as a phenomenon that it is structured in different ways according to the different effects received from environment and reaches its peak performance when the co-alignment of their endogenous factors with exogenous situational factors is achieved.en-US
dc.descriptionEl presente artículo realiza una revisión de las teorías de la contingencia estructural y la co-alineación estratégica, las cuales comprenden dos perspectivas medulares en el campo del análisis y diseño organizacional. Se concluye que desde que la teoría de sistemas superó la concepción clásica de la organización insular y cerrada, surgieron diversas corrientes investigativas considerando al ambiente como una de las variables más incidentes en los procesos organizacionales, entre ellas las denominadas teorías del ajuste, que explican a la organización como un fenómeno que se estructura de diferentes maneras según las diversas afectaciones que recibe del entorno y que alcanza su máximo desempeño cuando logra co-alinear sus factores endógenos con los factores situacionales exógenos.es-ES
dc.descriptionO presente artigo realiza uma revisão das teorias da contingência estrutural e do coalinhamento estratégico, as quais compreendem duas perspectivas medulares no campo da análise e do desenho organizacional. Conclui-se que desde que a teoria de sistemas superou a concepção clássica da organização insular e fechada, surgiram diversas correntes investigativas considerando ao ambiente como uma das variáveis mais incidentes nos processos organizacionais, entre elas as denominadas teorias do ajuste, que explicam a organização como um fenômeno que se estrutura de diferentes maneiras segundo os diversos impactos que recebe do meio e que atinge seu máximo desempenho quando consegue coalinhar seus fatores endógenos com os fatores situacionais exógenos.pt-BR
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherUniversidad Militar Nueva Granadaes-ES
dc.relationhttps://revistas.unimilitar.edu.co/index.php/rfce/article/view/645/403
dc.relation/*ref*/Anderson, T., & Warkov, S. (1961). “Organizational size and functional complexity: a study of differentiation in hospitals”. En: American Sociological Review, 26: 23-28.
dc.relation/*ref*/Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1983). “Central perspectives and debates in organization theory”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2): 245-273.
dc.relation/*ref*/Blau, P. (1970). “A formal theory of differentiation in organizations”. En: American Sociological Review, 35(2): 201-218.
dc.relation/*ref*/Burns, T. & Stalker, G. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
dc.relation/*ref*/Burton, R. & Obel, B. (2004). Strategic organizational diagnosis and design: The dynamics of fit. Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
dc.relation/*ref*/Burton, R., Obel, B. & DeSanctis, G. (2011). Organizational design: a step-by-step aprroach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and structure: chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise. Washington: MIT Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Channon, D. F. (1973). The strategy and structure of British enterprise. London: Macmillan Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Child, J. (1972a). “Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice”. En: Sociology, 6(1): 1-22.
dc.relation/*ref*/Child, J. (1972b). “Organization structure and strategies of control: a replication of the Aston study”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 17: 163-177.
dc.relation/*ref*/Child, J. (1973). “Strategies of control and organizational behavior”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 18: 1-17.
dc.relation/*ref*/Christensen, M. & Raynor, M. (2003). “Why hard-nosed executives should care about mangement theory”. En: Harvard Business Review, September: 4-10.
dc.relation/*ref*/Courtright, J., Fairhurst, G., & Rogers, E. (1989). “Interaction patterns in organic and mechanistic systems”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 32(4): 773-802.
dc.relation/*ref*/Dalton, D. R., Todor, W. D., Spendolini, M. J., Fielding, G. J., & Porter, L. W. (1980). “Organization structure and performance: A critical review”. En: Academy of Management Review, 5(1): 49-64.
dc.relation/*ref*/Dewar, R. & Werbel, J. (1979). “Universalistic and contingency predictions of employee satisfaction and conflict”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 426-448.
dc.relation/*ref*/Donaldson, L. (1987). “Strategy and structural adjustment to regain fit and performance in defence of contingency theory”. En: Journal of Management Studies, 24(1): 1-24.
dc.relation/*ref*/Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. California: Sage Publications.
dc.relation/*ref*/Doty, D., Glick, W. & Huber, G. (1993). “Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: a test of two configurational theories”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1196-1250.
dc.relation/*ref*/Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). “Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4): 514-539.
dc.relation/*ref*/Dyas, G. P. & Thanheiser, H. (1976). The emerging European enterprise: Strategy and structure in French and German industry. London: Macmillan Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Ensign, P. (2001). “The concept of fit in organizational research”. En: International Journal of Organization, Theory & Behavior, 4(3): 287-306.
dc.relation/*ref*/Fayol, H. (1949). General and Industrial Management. London: Pitman.
dc.relation/*ref*/Fegh-hi, N. (2010). “Strategic structure for organizational performance”. En: International Journal of Management & Innovation, 2(2): 9-23.
dc.relation/*ref*/Fry, L. W. (1982). “Technology-structure research: Three critical issues”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 25(3): 532-552.
dc.relation/*ref*/Fry, L. W., & Smith, D. A. (1987). “Congruence, contingency, and theory building”. En: Academy of Management Review, 12(1): 117-132.
dc.relation/*ref*/Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
dc.relation/*ref*/Grinyer, P. J. & Yasai-Ardekani, M. (1980). “Dimensions of organizational structure: a critical replication”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 23: 405-421.
dc.relation/*ref*/Hage, J. (1965). “An axiomate theory of organizations”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 10: 289-320.
dc.relation/*ref*/Hall, R. (1962). “Intraorganizational structural variation: application of the bureaucratic model”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 7: 295-308.
dc.relation/*ref*/Hinings, C.R., Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., & Turner, C. (1967). “An approach to the study of bureaucracy”. En: Sociology, 1: 61-72.
dc.relation/*ref*/Kast, F. E., & Rosenzweig, J. E. (1972). “General system theory: Applications for organization and management”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 15(4): 447-465.
dc.relation/*ref*/Katz, D & Kahn, R. (1966).The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
dc.relation/*ref*/Ketchen, D. J., Thomas, J. B., & Snow, C. C. (1993). “Organizational configurations and performance: a comparison of theoretical approaches”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1278–1313.
dc.relation/*ref*/Lawrence, P. & Lorsch, J. (1967). “differentiation and integration in complex organizations”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1): 1-47.
dc.relation/*ref*/Liao, C., Chuang, S., & To, P. (2011). “How knowledge management mediates the relationship between environment and organizational structure”. En: Journal of Business Research, 64(7): 728-736.
dc.relation/*ref*/Marín-Idárraga, D. A. (2012a). “Consideraciones epistemológicas en torno al carácter científico de la administración”. En: Innovar, 22(46): 39-52.
dc.relation/*ref*/Marín-Idárraga, D. A. (2012b). “Estructura organizacional y sus parámetros de diseño: análisis descriptivo en pymes industriales de Bogotá”. En: Estudios Gerenciales, 28(123): 43-64.
dc.relation/*ref*/McCaskey, M. (1974). “An introduction to organizational design”. En: California Management Review, 17(2): 13-20.
dc.relation/*ref*/Menguc, B., & Auh, S. (2010). “Development and return on execution of product innovation capabilities: The role of organizational structure”. En: Industrial Marketing Management, 39(5): 820-831.
dc.relation/*ref*/Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). “Configurational approaches to organizational analysis”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1175–1195.
dc.relation/*ref*/Meyer, M. (1971). “Some constraints in analyzing data on organizations structures”. En: American Sociological Review, 36: 294-297.
dc.relation/*ref*/Meyer, M. (1972). “Size and structure of organizations: a causal analysis”. En: American Sociological Review, 37: 434-440.
dc.relation/*ref*/Miller, D. (1987). “The genesis of configuration”. En: The Academy of Management Review, 12(4): 686-701.
dc.relation/*ref*/Miller, D. (1986). “Configurations of strategy and structure: towards a synthesis”. En: Strategic Management Journal, 7(3): 233-249.
dc.relation/*ref*/Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall.
dc.relation/*ref*/Nadler, D. A. & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by design: the power of organizational architecture. New York: Oxford University Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Nadler, D. A., & Tushman, M. L. (1999). “The organization of the future: Strategic imperatives and core competencies for the 21st century”. En: Organizational Dynamics, 28(1): 45-60.
dc.relation/*ref*/Perrow, Ch. (1967). “A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations”. En: American Sociological Review, 32(2): 194-208.
dc.relation/*ref*/Pfeffer, J. (1982). Organizations and organization theory. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing.
dc.relation/*ref*/Pugh, D. S. & Pheysey, D.C. (1972). “Some developments in the study of organizations”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly. 17: 273-276.
dc.relation/*ref*/Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinnings, C. R. & Turner, C. (1968). “Dimensions of organizational structure”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 13: 65-105.
dc.relation/*ref*/Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J. & Hinnings, C. R. (1969a). “The context of organization structures”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 14: 91-114.
dc.relation/*ref*/Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J. & Hinnings, C. R. (1969b), “An empirical taxonomy of work organizations”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 14: 115-126.
dc.relation/*ref*/Pugh, D.S. Hickson, D.J., Hinings, C.R., Macdonald, K.M., Turner, C., & Lupton, T. (1963). “A conceptual scheme for organizational analysis”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 8: 289-315.
dc.relation/*ref*/Rapert, M., & Wren, B. (1998). “Reconsidering organizational structure: A dual perspective of frameworks and process”. En: Journal of Managerial Issues, 10(3): 287-302.
dc.relation/*ref*/Reimann, B. C. (1973). “On the dimensions of bureaucratic structure: an empirical reappraisal”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 18: 462-476.
dc.relation/*ref*/Rumelt, R.P. (1974), Strategy, Structure, and Economic Performance. Boston, MA: Division of Research, Harvard Business School.
dc.relation/*ref*/Sahay, Y. P., & Gupta, M. (2011). “Role of organization structure in innovation in the bulk-drug industry”. En: Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 46(3): 450-464.
dc.relation/*ref*/Santra, T. & Giri, V. N. (2008). “Effect of organizational structure on organizational effectiveness through face-to-face communication”. En: ICFAI Journal of Organizational Behavior, 7(2): 28-38.
dc.relation/*ref*/Schoonhoven, C. B. (1981). “Problems with contingency theory: Testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency theory”. En: Administrative Science Ouarterly, 26: 349-377.
dc.relation/*ref*/Sexton, W. (2005). Teorías de la Organización (9 reimp). México: Trillas.
dc.relation/*ref*/Sillince, J. A. (2005). “A contingency theory of rhetorical congruence”. En: Academy of Management Review, 30(3): 608-621.
dc.relation/*ref*/Sutton, R. I. & Staw, B. M. (1995). “What theory is not”. En: Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3): 371-384.
dc.relation/*ref*/Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York: Harper & Brothers.
dc.relation/*ref*/Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw Hill.
dc.relation/*ref*/Tosi, H. & Platt, H. (1967). “Administrative ratios and organizational size”. En: Academy of Management Journal, 10: 161-168.
dc.relation/*ref*/Veliyath, R. & Srinivasan, T. C. (1995). “Gestalt approaches to assessing strategic coalignment: a conceptual integration”. En: British Journal of Management, 6(3): 205–219.
dc.relation/*ref*/Venkatraman, N. (1989). “The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence”. En: Academy of Management Review, 14(3): 423-444.
dc.relation/*ref*/Venkatraman, N. (1990). “Performance implications of strategic coalignment: A methodological perspective”. En: Journal of Management Studies, 27(1): 19-41.
dc.relation/*ref*/Venkatraman, N. & Camillus, J. C. (1984). “Exploring the concept of “fit” in strategic management”. En: Academy of Management Review, 9(3): 513-525.
dc.relation/*ref*/Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. NewYork: Free Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Weick, K. E. (1989). “Theory construction as disciplined imagination”. En: Academy of Management Review, 14: 516-531.
dc.relation/*ref*/Williamson, O. (1970). Corporate control and business behavior. Englewoods Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
dc.relation/*ref*/Woodward, J. (1965). Industrial organization: theory and practice. London: Oxford University Press.
dc.relation/*ref*/Zapata, G. & Mirabal, A. (2013). “Contingencia, voluntarismo y Strategic Choice: un análisis teórico de sus enfoques sobre el entorno y el diseño de la organización”. En: Universidad y Empresa, 24: 119-139.
dc.relation/*ref*/Zapata, G., Mirabal, A. & Hernández, A. (2009). “Modelo teórico conceptual de la estructura organizativa: un análisis contingente”. En: Ciencia y Sociedad, 34(4): 618-640.
dc.rightsDerechos de autor 2016 Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicases-ES
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0es-ES
dc.sourceRevista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; Vol. 22 No. 1 (2014); 153-168en-US
dc.sourceRevista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; Vol. 22 Núm. 1 (2014); 153-168es-ES
dc.sourceRevista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas; v. 22 n. 1 (2014); 153-168pt-BR
dc.source1909-7719
dc.source0121-6805
dc.subjectStructural contingencyen-US
dc.subjectStrategic co-alignmenten-US
dc.subjectOrganizational analysisen-US
dc.subjectOrganizational design.en-US
dc.subjectContingencia estructurales-ES
dc.subjectCo-alineación estratégicaes-ES
dc.subjectAnálisis organizacionales-ES
dc.subjectDiseño organizacional.es-ES
dc.subjectContingência estruturalpt-BR
dc.subjectCoalinhamento estratégicopt-BR
dc.subjectAnálise organizacionalpt-BR
dc.subjectDesenho organizacionalpt-BR
dc.titleOrganizational analysis and design theories: a review on contingent assumptions and strategic co-aligmenten-US
dc.titleTeorías del análisis y diseño organizacional: una revisión a los postulados contingentes y de la co-alineación estratégicaes-ES
dc.titleTeorías da análise e do desenho organizacional: uma revisão dos postulados contingentes e do coalinhamento estratégicopt-BR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución