The 20th century organization

By Catherine A. Riordan (criordan@umr.edu)

During this past century in the United States, we have seen organizations take many forms. In fact, most experts would say we have seen probably the most different fo rms during this century, with the most rapid changes among forms, than during any previous time in history.

The century opened in the industrial age, during which bigger and bigger companies were replacing small familybased farms and homes as primary employers. Businesses, government, the military and other organizations continued to grow, leading to the development of the academic discipline of management about mid-century. The first challenges of the discipline were the coordination of large groups of people in increasingly technical workp laces. Toward the end of the century, we see a marked increase in the growth of sma ll businesses, reversing the earlier trend.

Another trend spanning th is century was a changing view of the ideal organization. The view moved away from static, self-contained, we ll-defined structures, toward organizations with boundaries that are increasingly diffuse and highly integrated re lationships among firms. In the accompanying table, I've highlighted some of the basic trends in how people viewed the organizations - particu larly the business

Fluctuation in Thinking About Organizations During the 20th Century

19105 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT. FOCUS: Increases in size of organizations (factories, government, military) called for greater needs for coordination through formal systems. with an emphasis on uniformity and control. (Structure) 19205 CLASSICAL SCHOOL. FOCUS: This approach emphasized structural aspects of the organization and focused on controlling performance through commanding employees. and planning, organizing and coordination. A natural outgrowth was the focus on bureaucracy and the advantages its emphasis on order, rationality. uniformity and consistency had for efficiency and equitable treatment of employees. (Structure) 19405 HUMAN RELATIONS. FOCUS: This movement tried to bring the worker back into focus. emphasizing attitudes, feelings. the impact of relationships on performance, and the value of including workers in decision-making. (People! 1950S LEADERSHIP. FOCUS: The influence. decision-making and effectiveness of managers and other leaders were the hot topics in the ·50s. Distinctions between task and socio-emotionalleaders and Theory X and Theory Y leaders were drawn at this time. Business moving back into favor in society. (People) 1960S SYSTEMS. FOCUS: Organizations came to be viewed as systems with inputs, outputs. feedback and tendency toward equilibrium, and a need to adapt to the environment in order to avoid entropy. (Systems! 19805 CONTINGENCY THEORIES. FOCUS: Emphasized the relationships among organizations' fea tures and their environments and objectives. Organic rather than bureaucratic organizationa l structures being recommended for companies in very dynamic environments or involved in process rather than mass production are examples of this thinking. (Systems) 19905 ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE. FOCUS: New emphases on structures of organizations to serve objectives of being flexible, responsive, efficient. Strong emphasis on organizations that can adapt to rapidly changing environment Outsourcing of key functions adopted widely. (Adaptation!

organizations - of their times. Each of these orientations reflects a somewhat different emphasis on structures, the nature of people or the inclusion of a systems perspective.

In addition to the size and assumptions made about organ izations, over the course of this century, the re have been marked changes in the types and roles of organizations in our communities. While big bus inesses grew, military, government and health care organizations grew even more rapidly. In the last part of the century, we have seen the emergence of very large churches. The number of non-profit organizations, which were non-existent early in the century, has also grown rapidly. These organ izations are increasingly called upon to fill in the gaps previous ly covered by informal networks within co mmunities. Cath erin e A. Riordan is a professor of psychology and director of management systems at UMR, Sh e al so is the co-author of the book Impression Management in Organizations.

MSM -UMR ALUMNU S I Winlcr 1999 19