ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY AND BEHAVIOR

Two primary classifications of organizational structure are mechanistic and organic. The differences between mechanistic and organic organizational structures are expressed in the context of the level of formal structure and control embodied in the two organizational concepts (Daft, 1992, p. 140). The character of an organization's internal structure is often related to the external environment within which it functions. In this context, Warren Bennis (1976, pp. 2227) observed that organizations must strike a balance between openness to the external environment and protection from too much permeability. Organizations functioning within a stable external environment typically have formal internal organizational structures with clearly established and observed operating procedures and rules, and a well defined hierarchy of authority. Within such organizations, decision making is typically topdown in character. This type of organizational structure is mechanistic in character. Organizations functioning within a dynamic external

. . .
on of both types of power may be appropriate. It is useful, therefore, to define overt and unobtrusive power. Overt power use "refers to the ability to secure preferred outcomes in the face of competition and conflict among declared opponents" (Hardy, 1985, p. 388). Within organizations, overt power derives from an ability to "control . . . scarce resources and resource dependencies" (Hardy, 1985, p. 396). Unobtrusive power, by contrast to overt power, "refers to the ability to secure preferred outcomes by preventing conflict from arising" (Hardy, 1985, p. 399). Within organizations, unobtrusive power is "derived hegemonic and symbolic sources which are brought into play to legitimize outcomes" (Hardy, 1985, p. 396). The literature indicates that a variety of factors may be implicated in the application of power within organizations by managers. The quality and style of organizational leadership may be a major cause of organizational conflict, and, in turn, is directly related to the management of such conflict (Carew, ParisiCarew, and Blanchard, 1986, pp. 4650). Leadership is often implicated in the development of organizational conflict, when the style is either highly authoritarian or indifferent (House, 1984, pp. 85
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Hawthorne Effect, Stress Stress, Frederick Herzberg, Krishnan Thompson, Parasuraman Alutto, SMWTs Barton, Mahler Nicholson, Warren Bennis, Salancik Pfeffer, Lenz Engledow, organizational structure, 1991 pp, 1992 pp, 1984 pp, alutto 1984, parasuraman alutto 1984, parasuraman alutto, skinner 1953, mahler nicholson 1989, nicholson 1989, shani grant, mahler nicholson, gortner mahler nicholson, 1984 pp 4567, grant krishnan thompson,
Approximate Word count = 7137
Approximate Pages = 29 (250 words per page)

More Essays on ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY AND BEHAVIOR