Morgan Chapter 3
1. Some people argue that Abraham Maslow’s hierarchical needs theory can be interpreted too literally,
and as a result found suspect. What do you suppose this means? How should it be taken?
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs can be interpreted too literally to mean that the basic need of an
employee is the salary and wage they will receive and this is what the organization needs to fulfill.
Employees only come to work to get their paycheck and that is where their commitment ends.
However, considering the portion of their life that an employee spends at work, the majority of
employees will want to improve themselves through the job satisfaction that comes with being part
of bettering the organization they work for. The organization can redesign conditions for personal
growth that will promote employee empowerment and benefit the organization more than just paying
their employees a salary.
2. Why is it useful to think of human beings as constantly needful, in the context of studying organizations?
When studying organizations, it is helpful to look at human beings as
constantly needful so that we can determine if the organization is creating a employee friendly work
environment. An organization needs to focus on the idea of making employees feel more useful and
important by giving them meaningful jobs and by giving as much autonomy, responsibility, and
recognition as possible.
Employees need to be seen as valuable resources because they are the heart of the organization and
without them, the organization would cease to exist. The organization needs to focus on what will
aid in making the employees as beneficial to the organization as possible through rewards and
incentives in various forms.
3. Is it possible to apply Maslow’s theory to organizations? Societies?
I think that you could loosely apply Maslow’s hierarchy to organizations as well. I know that with
Clayton Homes, where I work, we began as a used car dealership and successfully grew to a Fortune
500 Company. Our organization is now made up of the mobile home retail stores, which most of us
are familiar with, but is also comprised of communities where once the customer buys the home,
they have a place to put it. We have our own financing through Vanderbilt Mortgage, our own
insurance, and of course, manufacturing where all of the homes are made. Once the company
reached this billion dollar level, it was not enough. We then worked to be the best we could be and
were named Manufacturer of the Year – which could be classified as the self-actualization level. I
don’t think that we are done striving for better things, though. I think that any firm, in order to
compete, has to follow some form of using this ladder to improve the way their organization is run.
I think that it is useful to apply Maslow’s theory to organizations, but would not suggest using it as
law on the way that employees behave.
It suggests a whole range of motivational levels that can be used to inspire an employee to be
productive. By varying the means of motivation, the organization finds mutual benefit through
employee input and commitment without additional expenditures.
I think that the same theory holds true for societies. Without spending extra money, we can form
non-profit groups or organizations that have the sole purpose to help the community, state, or nation.
By giving them a sense of purpose and sense of belonging, many great things can be done without
paying great sums. I am thinking of all the many volunteers in the great charities or non-profit
organizations that are motivated by the self-fulfillment of helping out another and feeling a great
sense of achievement. Societies can definitely use this theory to organize great associations.
4. What are the liabilities of using such relative terms as mechanistic and organic to describe
organizational structures? (pg 46-47)
When change in the environment becomes the order of the day, open and flexible styles of
organization and management are required. Different types of organizations encounter different
rates and levels of environmental change.
If an environment is stable, the firm can use a mechanistic - highly structured straight-laced type
of management where there is one solution for every problem. However, as with the example in the
book of the rayon mill, because they were so extremely structured, they restrained sales volume as to
not interrupt the daily flow, thus “shooting themselves in the heel” as far as maximizing profits.
If an environment is uncertain and turbulent, the firm would use a more organic or flexible structure
that could efficiently keep up with the changing environment. In fact, in this sort of environment, as
is common in the technology industries, it is more prevalent that the firm forecast what will evolve
before it happens so that it can keep up and stay new and innovative in a vastly competitive market.
The liability in using such terms is that the firms are not restricted to fit into any of these categories.
There should be times when the firm needs to function “by the book” yet other times when the firm
needs to be innovative and stay competitive in order to survive. In fact, the book states, “an
effective organization depends on achieving a balance or compatibility between strategy, structure,
technology, the commitments and needs of people, and the external environment”.
5. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the organization as organism metaphor.
Strengths:
1. Develop an understanding between organizations and their environments. It describes the
organization as existing in an open system where the environment has a great impact on the way
the organization is run.
2. The management of organizations can often be improved through systematic attention to the
“needs” that must be satisfied if the organization is to survive. It emphasizes survival as the main
task facing any organization which helps the goals to not be ends in themselves, but mediums to
survival.
3. The focus on “needs” encourages us to see organizations as interacting processes that have to be
balanced internally as well as in relation to the environment. Strategy, structure, technology,
human, and managerial dimensions are subsystems with living needs that must be satisfied in a
mutually beneficial way.
4. In identifying different “species” of organization, we are alerted to the fact that in organizing we
always have a range of options. Matrix, team-based, organic are all forms of solutions we can
use to combat a specific hurdle.
5. The metaphor stresses the virtue of organic forms of organization in the process of innovation.
The chapter argues that if innovation is a priority, then flexible, dynamic, project-oriented matrix
or organic forms of organization will be superior to the mechanistic-bureaucratic.
Weaknesses:
1. The rise in importance of the organismic metaphor is a product of changing times that has
undermined the efficiency of bureaucratic organizations.
2. The metaphor leads us to view organizations and their environments in a way that is far too
concrete. Nature presents itself as being objective and real in every aspect. However, this
image breaks down when applied to society and organization because organizations and their
environments can be understood as socially constructed phenomena. Their shape and
structure is much more fragile and tentative than the material structure of an organism.
3. It is misleading to suggest that organizations need to “adapt” to their environment or that
environments “select” the organizations that are to survive. On the contrary, organizations
have a choice as to whether they are to compete or collaborate. Collaborating organizations
actions can have an impact on the environment.
4. The metaphor also assumes “functional unity” – interdependence where every element of the
system works for all the other elements. The different elements of an organization are
usually capable of living separate lives and often do so.
5. It encourages us to believe that the unity and harmony characteristic of organisms can be
achieved in organizational life. However, in organizations, self-interest is a major conflict.
6. The danger of the metaphor becoming an ideology. When we take the parallels between
nature and society too seriously we fail to see that human beings have a large measure of
influence and choice over what their world can be.
6. Is it possible an organization totally aligned (strategically, technologically, culturally, structurally, and
managerially) with its environment could fail?
It is always possible for an organization to fail. Even when the organization appears to be totally
aligned with the environment, it is possible for the environment to change, and the organization may
not be adapt to change as quickly as the environment is moving.
7. Is it possible to have a company that is too democratic, organic, self-actualizing oriented, complex in its
roles, and proactive, for its environment?
It is possible for a company to be too much of any of the adjectives listed above. Some
environments are completely stable. The best way to survive in this type of environment would be to
be more mechanistic in order to maximize efficiency. Stable environments usually have great
competition, which forces prices to a minimum. The organization must be efficient in order to make
a profit. Being too proactive in this environment might be too risky.
8.
What does it mean to say that the population ecology model may be a little too deterministic?
According to the population ecology model, if we accept at face value the theory that environments
select organizations for survival, then in the long run it doesn’t matter what we do, our destiny has
already been chosen for us. Population ecology has downplayed the importance of the choice of
strategic direction for an organization - which is so critical. Even if an organization is not the best fit
to survive an environment, it is possible for the organization to transform itself from one kind of
organization into a more profitable one. Take for example Federal Express. With the technological
advances in emailing, many of the contracts and documents that had to be shipped Fed Ex are now
being transferred instantaneously over the web.
9. What does it mean to say that organizations and their environments are involved in co-creation, as is
said by those who espouse organizational ecology?
Environments are involved in co-creation meaning they help produce each other. Organizational
environments are composed of other organizations. They are able to influence the nature of their
environment. They play an active role in shaping their future when teaming with other
organizations. It is sometimes more beneficial for organizations to collaborate as opposed to
compete. We have seen oil prices rise tremendously this summer due to the fact that no competition
is present. So instead of competition forcing the price down, collaboration has caused the price to
skyrocket.