DECREASING ORGANIZATIONAL SIZE TO UNTANGLE OR NOT TO UNTANGLE? A CRITIQUE
This research critiques the article identified below this paragraph. The critique considers the relevance of the article to organization and management, the effectiveness of the author in convincing the reader of the reasonableness of the position stated, the reviewer's perception of the strengths and weakness of the article, and the reviewer's opinions on the points made in the article.
McKinley, William. (1992). Decreasing organizational size: To untangle or not to untangle? Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 112 123.
Downsizing is a major phenomenon in the contemporary American economy (Hammonds, 1991, pp. 34 36). Thus, the relevance of McKinley's (1992, pp. 112 123) is well established.
McKinely (1992, pp. 112 123) makes two main points in the article. First, the author contends that it is wrong to assume that a symmetry exists between organizational growth and organizational decline (McKinely, 1992, pp. 113 116). McKinley (1992, pp. 113 116) contends further that the acceptance of this assumption is one of the root causes of ineffective (often) or disastrous (at times) attempt at downsizing by American organizations. McKinley (1992, pp. 113 116) makes a convincing argument in the article in support of this contention.
Second, McKinely (1992, pp. 117 119) contends that it is wrong to assume that work force decline reduces coordination and control needs. In point of fact, McKinley (1992, pp. 117 119)
argues that just the opposite is the case more often than not. Again, the author makes a convincing argument in support of this contention in the article.
The principle strength of this article is the author's focus on his main points of contention the falsity of two principle assumptions underlying the argument that downsizing will lead to less mechanistic organizations. The principle weakness of th...