Organizational Theory, Structure, Leadership and Change

Posted on Feb 7, 2026 in Psychology

Definition of Organization and Main Aspects

Give a definition of organization, illustrating and briefly describing the main aspects that characterize it. An organization is characterized by groups of individuals who carry out interdependent activities to achieve objectives and who develop and maintain stable behavior patterns. The main internal components are the social structure, the physical structure, the technology, and the culture. Organizations, from the Latin “organon,” meaning tool, aim to coordinate in a rational way the efforts of several individuals to achieve a common goal, defined by the mission (the purpose) and the vision (the horizon).

Indicators of Organizational Performance

Indicate and briefly describe what may be the possible indicators of organizational performance. Organizations, in carrying out their activities, must ensure some functioning requirements:

Effectiveness: the degree to which the organization manages to reach its goals. Judgments of effectiveness imply an ex-post evaluation of the achievement of objectives.
Efficiency: the ratio between the result achieved and the resources used to obtain it. An organization is efficient when it organizes the various resources economically. Some indicators are, for example, labor productivity and the productivity of a plant.
Economy: a concept that integrates effectiveness and efficiency, indicating the capacity of an organization, in the long term, to use its resources efficiently and to achieve its objectives effectively.
Quality: the measure of the characteristics of an entity compared to what is expected from it for a specific use.

Total Quality Management (TQM)

Total Quality Management. TQM is an organizational strategy aimed at significantly improving quality in the organization and spreading awareness of quality in all organizational processes. The key elements are:

Common base values shared by all company members
An operational strategy focused on pursuing quality
Continuous improvement aimed at excellence
Involvement of all components of the organization
Innovation understood as a constant process and through small steps (kaizen)

Over time, TQM has undergone conceptual adjustments, increasingly concentrating on the external objective of customer satisfaction, intended also as the internal customer (employees and collaborators) rather than only an internal organizational aspect.

Differentiation and Coordination-Integration

Explain what differentiation and coordination-integration processes are and why they are relevant for organizational action. Organizations are based on processes of differentiation and integration. Differentiation is the first step to divide work, define the structure of tasks, and assign them to people according to the expected result. Differentiation is a technical necessity of any moderately complex activity that requires the contribution of different work roles, and an adequate differentiation process is a condition of success for every organization. However, it is necessary that a corresponding process of coordination-integration brings back to unity what has been divided. To coordinate means to make people work together toward a shared goal, and it is the essence and necessary requirement of the organization. If adequate levels of coordination-integration do not correspond to differentiation processes, differentiation becomes pathological and dysfunctional. Thompson identifies three distinct coordination methods: through standardization (rules and routines), through programs (planning schemes), and through mutual adjustment (when actors coordinate by exchanging information during the activity itself).

Core Competencies

Talk about core competencies. When talking about a company’s core competencies, we refer to the distinctive competences that make it unique in the market. They include intrinsic and salient characteristics, such as attitudes, abilities, technical knowledge, and vision. Among the main changes in organizational strategies—following crises of Western companies, globalization and opening to international markets, the growing competitive capacity of Eastern companies, and the success criterion based on organizational culture—there is the shift from internalization to outsourcing. From the former (absorbing within their boundaries workers, technologies, inputs, and systems), companies move to outsourcing all non-core activities, with a progressive streamlining of the large firm to focus on distinctive, identity-building elements (core competencies). Aspects expressing subjectivity, emotions as interpretative keys, and the value of experience and quality become increasingly important.

Formal Structure and Company Functions

Talk about the formal structure and company functions. The formal structure of an organization refers to the explicit, formalized, and legitimate division of responsibilities and authority; it specifies how work must be carried out and what the relationships between people are. It differs from the informal structure, which includes all norms and expectations that are not formally legitimized. The formal structure identifies the grouping of individuals into organizational units and the grouping of these units within the whole organization. It identifies formal dependency relationships, span of control, coordination and communication methods. Chandler defines structure as the scheme through which the company is administered; it includes channels of authority and communication between organizational units, and the information that flows through those channels.

Company functions constitute an aspect of organizational structure. A company function consists of a series of activities of the same nature, grouped together because they concern the same operational object and are aimed at achieving the company’s objective. They are generally divided into:

Primary functions: directly concerned with production and sale (e.g., production).
Support functions: support the core ones by providing the necessary resources (material, intangible, human). These include strict support functions (HR, secretariat), staff functions (R&D, quality control), and infrastructural functions (control, finance, accounting).

Simple vs Functional Structure

Differences between a simple structure (ERA 1) and a functional structure (ERA 1), and their pros and cons. The simple structure is typical of small organizations, both in terms of products and customers. It is common in family-run businesses, such as a hotel managed by a family. The organizational setup is divided into two governing bodies: at the upper level there is general management, and at the lower level there are operational units. This structure has low formalization, and people management is generally personalistic. These aspects can sometimes be positive, since they allow flexible management. However, this structure enters into crisis when the variety of required products or customers increases, and in competitive situations with larger firms.

Unlike the simple structure, the functional structure is suitable for medium and large organizations. Work is divided into functional areas according to the function performed—following the “know-how” criterion: individuals with similar skills or knowledge belong to the same subdivision. Hierarchy is the main mechanism for decisions, coordinating activities, and solving problems. This type of structure is suitable for organizations with one product or a few product lines. Its main weaknesses are slow response to environmental changes and low horizontal coordination between functions, resulting in a limited view of general objectives.

Divisional vs Matrix Structure

Differences between a divisional structure (ERA 1) and a matrix structure (ERA 1), and their pros and cons. The divisional structure arose due to companies’ growth needs. The model involves grouping organizational units based on divisions represented by products, markets, or geographic areas. The model includes decentralization of power at the level of each division, which is conceived as a “quasi-enterprise.” This type of structure is often preferred by large organizations (e.g., Microsoft) and is very suitable in unstable environments because it facilitates coordination among the functions of a division and reduces complexity. Moreover, there is decentralization of the decision-making process, which brings the place of decision closer to the place of the problem. Disadvantages include the reduction of economies of scale and difficulties in coordinating the different divisions, whose members may identify more with their division than with the organization as a whole.

The matrix structure combines the vertical structure with strong horizontal integration: there is traditional control within functional departments and improved coordination between them. The logic behind it is transversality. The structure is characterized by several divisional levels associated with functions and permanent bodies responsible for producing a product or product line. The matrix is used in organizational settings such as banks or hospitals. The integration process varies depending on customer needs and task characteristics, and functional differentiation is strong. It is effective in dynamic environments: it provides rapid responses to changes and innovation, shows strong orientation to context and customers, and is flexible. However, it is complex to implement and manage: it exposes members to double dependence (hierarchical and functional), requires long coordination times, demands clarity and commitment to objectives, and requires interpersonal abilities and efforts to maintain power balance.

Divisional Compared to Functional Structure

Differences between divisional and functional structures, with pros and cons. The divisional structure groups units by product, market, or geography and decentralizes decision-making to each division, conceived as a quasi-enterprise. It works well in unstable environments, improving coordination inside each division and reducing complexity, but it reduces economies of scale and can create coordination difficulties and stronger divisional identity. In contrast, the functional structure divides work by function (know-how), uses hierarchy for decision-making, and suits organizations with one or a few product lines. Its weaknesses are slow response to change and low horizontal coordination, leading to a limited overall vision.

Network Structure Model (ERA 3)

Definition of a network structure model (ERA 3), with characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages. Network structures arise from major changes in markets—more turbulent and unpredictable—responding to the need for more flexible and adaptive organizational models, supported by the development of ICT. These are reticular structures, based on multiple, dense, and close ties with other units or organizations that perform part of the activities needed by the organization. The relational dimension prevails over the structural one. The organization has the role of strategic coordination and outsources non-core activities. The orientation toward the context is expressed in core values: flexibility, uncertainty management, and autonomy. There are few rules, weak or no hierarchy, and various control mechanisms such as trust.

The decision to outsource depends on comparing internal coordination costs with market transaction costs. If advantageous, the firm chooses to perform the activity outside its boundaries and activate relationships with other firms that collaborate in the production process independently and with legal autonomy, while engaging in reciprocal and mutually supportive actions. However, evaluating the economic benefit of outsourcing is not always easy (quality may be affected), and the choice may also be motivational—not only instrumental.

Population and Niche in Organizational Ecology

Explain what is meant by “population” and “niche” within Hannan and Freeman’s population ecology theory. A particularly relevant concept for organizational ecology, taken from biology, is the niche, which refers to the role of a population (or species) within a community and the way it obtains resources. The niche represents the set of environmental conditions within which a population is able to reproduce. The concept of population indicates a group of organizations that share similar forms and environmental vulnerabilities.

Organizational Ecology (Hannan & Freeman). Organizational ecology is a research paradigm that explains organizational outcomes in terms of the demographic composition of organizational populations. Its main question is: WHY DO SO MANY DIFFERENT FORMS AND TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS EXIST? Answering this requires identifying causes of increased variety (new forms) and causes of decreased variety (competition and disappearance). The basic assumption is that understanding organizational diversity requires population thinking, where populations are aggregates of organizations sharing common dependence on cultural and material environments.

Research is divided into three levels of analysis, sometimes interrelated:

Demography of organizational populations: variations in vital processes
Organizational population: a set of organizations that share a common form and operate in a given region
Organizational community: a spatially or functionally bounded set of populations that interact with one another

The evolutionary approach underlying organizational ecology identifies four processes guiding organizational evolution:

Variation: changes in routines, competencies, or form (may be unconscious or intentional)
Selection: elimination of certain types of variation
Retention: reproduction of selected variations
Struggle: process aimed at obtaining scarce resources (material/economic resources, but also legitimacy)

Resource Dependence Theory (Pfeffer & Salancik)

Explain the foundations of the Resource Dependence Theory (RDT) of Pfeffer & Salancik. According to resource dependence theory, no organization is completely autonomous; organizations are embedded in an environment composed of other organizations. The context is crucial for understanding organizational behavior, since it strongly influences organizational action by controlling the resources (raw materials, capital, knowledge and technologies, workforce…) on which the organization depends. According to the authors, an organization’s goal is to minimize dependence on other organizations and to find ways to influence them. Organizations may adopt many strategies to pursue autonomy and reduce constraints (e.g., a firm purchasing input suppliers to reduce dependency).

The degree of dependence of one organization on another depends on two main factors: the importance of the resource and the extent to which that resource is controlled by another organization. Managers can reduce such influence by deepening their knowledge of the environment through network analysis—the system of power and dependency relationships between actors. Steps include: identifying resources; estimating importance (criticality) and availability (scarcity); identifying factors that influence the organization–resource relationship; and identifying ways to reduce dependence or the strength of those influencing factors. Power is the most relevant factor: scarcity of critical resources creates uncertainty; uncertainty creates opportunities to differentiate power. Those higher in the command hierarchy have greater access to such resources; therefore, power tends to be stable and self-perpetuating.

Institutional Perspectives and Neo-Institutionalism

The Institutional Perspective. No organization can be understood without considering its cultural and social context and organizational environment in cultural, technical, and economic terms. Environments create infrastructures that constrain and support organizations, which are embedded in cultural systems that define how their worlds operate. Organizations tend to “institutionalize” themselves by adopting practices infused with intrinsic (non-instrumental) values, eventually becoming institutions themselves. Environments influence organizations by exerting both technical/economic pressures—rewarding those efficient and effective—and social/cultural pressures—rewarding those that conform to societal rules, norms, and values.

Neo-Institutionalism. New institutionalism distinguishes institutions (the rules of the game) from organizations (the players). Institutions consist of cognitive structures, norms, and rules (formal and/or informal) that give meaning and stability to social behavior. Organizations operate within structured fields composed of other organizations with reciprocal influences and constraints.

Some principles:

Organizations reflect the structure of socially constructed reality (isomorphism).
The environment dictates common rules that become standards for judging appropriateness (social legitimacy) of behavior. Conformity—adopting routines or value systems—improves access to resources and survival chances.
Organizations adapt through natural (competition) and institutional (coercive, mimetic, normative) isomorphism.

Thompson and the Model of Organizational Action

Thompson and the model of organizational action. The environment is a field of action—a territory chosen and defined by organizational decisions. It consists of the set of action processes relevant to organizational activity, meaning the events and actors able to influence the organization’s operations. Organizational action is a set of action programs in which goals to be achieved are linked to the means available. Its purpose is to study the organization as a process of actions guided by intentional yet bounded rationality that deals with uncertainty.

For Thompson, each organization defines its own field of action through the organizational process itself, which concerns resource procurement, the product, the clientele served, and the services provided. The organization establishes points of contact with the environment. According to this approach, the environment does not preexist naturally nor does it simply condition organizational choices; rather, it results from selection processes and is subject to continual redefinition. Choosing the field of action allows the organization to determine constraints and contingencies—stable or variable obstacles that stand between the organization and its objectives. Structure, in Thompson’s analysis, becomes an active component of organizational rationality to confront and reduce uncertainty. Thompson identifies three types of structures depending on coordination forms: standardization, programming, and mutual adjustment. An organization should be evaluated based on its capacity to adapt to degrees of uncertainty in relation to the environment.

Organizational Environment and Transaction Cost Economics

What is meant by “organizational environment”? The organizational environment is the set of elements and external forces able to influence organizational behavior. It consists of what lies beyond the organization’s boundaries—providing raw materials and resources (inputs) and absorbing its products and services (outputs). It can be divided into two levels:

Task (or specific) environment: directly and significantly affects the organization (e.g., suppliers, customers).
General environment: may indirectly influence the organization (e.g., government, culture).

Bounded rationality and opportunism in Williamson’s Transaction Cost Economics (TCE). According to TCE, the firm is a governance structure for transactions, aiming to minimize their costs. The market is not always a perfect coordination mechanism. Two factors limit market efficiency:

Bounded rationality: individuals are intentionally rational but only within limits; decisions are imperfect due to physiological, contextual, time-related, informational, and cognitive constraints.
Opportunism: pursuit of self-interest through deceitful behavior to obtain personal advantage.

Both factors favor informational asymmetries and increase transaction costs.

General and Task Environments, Contingency Approach

Explain the role of “general environment” and “task (reference) environment” and introduce the contingency approach. The task environment includes factors that have a direct and significant impact on organizational goal achievement (e.g., competitors, suppliers). The general environment includes forces that do not directly affect the organization but can influence its behavior indirectly (e.g., government, culture).

Contingency Approach. An organization’s structure depends on environmental conditions. Burns and Stalker describe mechanistic vs. organic systems. Different environmental conditions require different organizational functioning and levels of control and formalization:

Stable environments → mechanistic systems: high division of labor, emphasis on authority and control, formal downward communication, vertical relations, obedience to superiors (hierarchy), position-based power.
Dynamic environments → organic systems: low specialization and formalization, emphasis on experience, flexible task redefinition, widespread problem-solving orientation, decentralized decision-making, strong lateral interaction, and focus on objectives.

Strategic contingency of power: Groups or units best able to resolve critical, strategic problems gain power over time.

Uncertainty and Environmental Contexts

Discuss uncertainty in environmental contexts (organizations as uncertainty management). The external and internal environment generates uncertainty, a perception arising from complexity and instability. Those who reduce unpredictability and increase control gain greater power.

Duncan: the environment has varying degrees of uncertainty depending on complexity and rate of change; uncertainty depends on decision-makers’ perceptions.
Milliken: uncertainty is “the perceived inability of an individual to predict something accurately.” Managers must handle three types of uncertainty:

Environmental uncertainty: degree of understanding of the environment (information, nature of changes).
Effect uncertainty: the impact and timing an environmental change will have.
Response uncertainty: available options (resources, choices, possible actions and consequences for the organization).

Leadership Theories and Change

Talk about the change theories of leadership. There are three types of leadership theories: universalistic theories (absolute leaders), contingency theories (diagnose and adapt), and change theories. According to change theories, a leader manages turbulence, defines the organization’s vision, and guides emotions and behaviors coherently with the mission. Leaders must handle environmental complexity and uncertainty, decide despite varied information, and achieve objectives through diverse collaborators, often with limited direct control.

Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership. A transformational leader inspires and motivates people to reach high goals and develop their leadership skills. This leader focuses on long-term vision and personal growth rather than rewards or exchanges. The relationship is based on mutual support: the leader transforms followers, and followers help the organization improve. The theory is based on the 4 I’s:

Individualized consideration: the leader listens, understands each person’s needs, and acts as a mentor.
Intellectual stimulation: encourages creativity, innovation, and questioning of old ideas.
Inspirational motivation: shows enthusiasm, gives purpose, and unites the team around a shared vision.
Idealized influence: is a moral role model, builds trust, and acts as an ethical reference point.

Situational Leadership Theory

Situational leadership theory. No single leadership style works in every situation. Effectiveness depends on context, so leaders must analyze each situation and adapt. Models include Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s continuum of seven styles, Fiedler’s contingency model (match between leader orientation and control), and Hersey and Blanchard’s situational model (style depends on group maturity).

Universalistic Theories and Subordinates

Universalistic theories. These posit that certain traits make “natural leaders,” stable across contexts. Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) identified three main styles: democratic, laissez-faire, and autocratic. The role of subordinates in leadership theories. Shamir analyzed the changing perspective regarding subordinates, grouping approaches into five categories based on the role assigned to followers:

Recipients of the leader’s influence
Moderators of the leader’s impact
Constructors of leadership
Substitutes for leadership
Leaders (leadership as a dispersed process)

Symbolic Management and Leadership Styles

Symbolic management. A leader shapes meanings and culture, removing old meanings and creating new ones that support development. Leaders become symbols inside the organization, communicating values and vision through symbolic actions.

Lewin, Lippitt, and White: leadership styles and group effects. Three styles affect emotional climate and group performance:

Autocratic: directive, controls group; high performance when leader present but negative climate.
Democratic: encourages participation and joint decision-making; positive climate and sustained performance.
Laissez-faire: passive leader, high autonomy; often low performance and negative climate unless collaborators are highly competent.

Ethical and unethical leadership. Ethical leaders have moral character and deep ethical values; unethical leadership ranges from laissez-faire to abusive, producing negative outcomes for collaborators, the organization, and stakeholders.

Decisions, Bounded Rationality, and Models

Decisions as processes of bounded rationality. Bounded rationality explains that people try to make rational decisions but cannot be fully rational due to cognitive limits and incomplete information. Real decisions are made with the best available information, producing “good enough” solutions rather than perfect ones.

Thompson Decision-Making Model

Thompson decision-making model. Decision-making depends on two things: how we understand cause–effect relations (methods) and what outcomes we prefer (goals). When both are clear, decisions follow calculation strategies. If goals are clear but cause–effect is uncertain, judgment strategies (trial-and-error, consulting experts) are used. If cause–effect is clear but goals are uncertain, compromise strategies (negotiation, voting) apply. When both are unclear, intuition strategies (improvisation) are used. Decisions depend on certainty, uncertainty, and ambiguity.

Bounded Irrationality and the Garbage Can Model

Decisions as processes of bounded irrationality. Irrational decision-making occurs when behavior is not fully logical. Decisions are influenced by personal factors (ambivalence, anxiety) and interpersonal dynamics (competition, envy, collusion). Cohen, March, and Olsen explain this through the “garbage can model,” where decisions emerge from a random combination of problems, solutions, participants, and choice opportunities—used when rational decision-making is not possible.

Political View of Organizations and Power

Political view of organizations; organizations as arenas of power. From a political perspective, organizations are arenas where different groups and individuals compete for power. Power allows influence over decisions, control of resources, and guidance of the organization toward particular goals. Organizations are places where interests are defended, coalitions formed, negotiations occur, and tactics are used depending on resources and preferences. Decision-making is strongly influenced by political dynamics; managerial roles often balance interests, mediate disagreements, and guide collective action.

Definition of power in organizations and main characteristics. Organizational power is the ability to produce effects on a group, an organization, or its members. Sources include formal authority, control of scarce resources, control of decision-making, control of knowledge and information, and alliances and networks. Power tends to be stable and self-reinforcing. Power is relational (exists within interactions), interdependent (actors depend on each other), and multilateral (continuous exchanges). From a modernist perspective, power is often understood as the ability to control uncertainty.

Organizational Myopia and Learning from Errors

Definition of “organizational myopia” and contributing factors. Organizational myopia means that an organization cannot see reality clearly or understand how situations may develop. It appears as difficulty seeing early warnings of danger and difficulty seeing signals of new opportunities. Causes include individual limits (cognitive biases, limited rationality, emotional reactions) and organizational conditions (poor coordination, rigid structures, bad information flows, inertia). It can also be influenced by the interorganizational environment, where many actors compete for attention and set different priorities.

Organizational myopia can be seen at three levels:

Micro (individual): biased or incorrect decisions due to limited rationality, self-serving bias, wishful thinking, familiarity bias, discounting the future, omission bias, or preference for the status quo.
Meso (organizational): failures in threat analysis, information integration, coordination, or learning (fragmented structures, groupthink, denial, arrogance, dependence on old competencies).
Macro (interorganizational): coordination difficulties between organizations, agenda-setting conflicts, limited attention, and political dynamics that distort focus.

Learning from Errors: NAT and HRT

Theories on accidents: NAT and HRT.

NAT – Normal Accident Theory. Major accidents derive from interactions of unexpected sequences of errors and events in poorly structured situations. Systems with interactive complexity (non-linear interactions) and tight coupling (strong interdependence) will inevitably produce unexpected interactions of errors that can overcome safety devices; accidents are therefore “normal” results in such systems.

HRT – High Reliability Theory. Learning from errors can occur even in complex, high-risk environments to improve managerial practices, contain consequences of errors, and improve safety. Safe operation is possible with highly risky technologies if organizations follow specific management principles and organizational requirements.

Turner and Theories on Accidents

Turner’s “Man-Made Disasters.” Turner analyzed accidents as phenomena linked to organizational processes and bounded rationality. According to Turner:

Accidents must be understood as sociotechnical problems.
Every accident shares phases with other accidents.
Accidents are always the result of a failure of foresight.
Accidents must be analyzed from an interorganizational perspective.
Understanding and activating safety cultures are central to increasing resilience.

Theories on accidents (chronology):

1960s/70s: “Techno-centric” theories focused on technology as cause and aimed at technical safety improvements.
1980s: “Human-centric” theories emphasized human error by operators as causes.
1990s: Sociotechnical theories recognized organizational failures and interactions among technological, human, and organizational components as causes.

Reason’s latent factor theory (Swiss cheese model). Every accident is generated by unsafe acts and latent factors. Unsafe acts are errors or violations by front-line operators. Latent factors are managerial decisions or actions whose harmful consequences appear only when combined with local triggers that break defenses. A strong proactive orientation reduces risk by decreasing latent factors.

Theories of Change and Lewin’s Model

The four theories of change. Van de Ven and Van de Poole identify four theories explaining organizational change:

Life-cycle theory: organizations have an internal program regulating change toward a prefigured final state; change is evolutionary and cumulative.
Teleological (intentional) change: development cycles from defining goals to implementation, evaluation, and modification; change is intentional and adaptive.
Dialectical (conflict) change: change occurs when competing forces or values have enough power to break the status quo.
Evolutionary or competitive change: change through variation, selection, and retention; variation produces new forms, selection filters them via competition, and retention sustains the survivors.

Lewin’s model of change. Lewin defines change as temporary instability acting on existing equilibrium. Before change, there is a balance between forces pushing for change and resisting it. When pushing forces overcome resistance, an “unfreezing” phase begins, followed by change and a “refreezing” phase where a new equilibrium is established, which may later be challenged.

Resistance to Change

Why do resistances to change exist? Resistance consists of defensive behaviors enacted by actors in a change process. Change generates emotions from acceptance to rejection. Defensive action is often physiological and normal: leaving the known for the unknown is challenging. Study of resistance considers subjective and contextual antecedents and consequences. Main individual sources include uncertainty, insecurity about the new, selective perception of information, and habit. Group and organizational sources include power dynamics, conflict, organizational structure, and culture.

Types of Resistance to Change

Types (Hambrick & Cannella, 1989):

Blind resistance: generic, automatic fear or intolerance toward change → address with information, reassurance, and awareness-building (e.g., past successes).
Political resistance: fear of losing valuable assets (status, job, money) → address with negotiation, compromise, incentives, and showing future advantages.
Ideological resistance: values or beliefs make change unacceptable → use persuasion based on facts and data and the presence of a neutral third party (e.g., consultant).

Organizational Innovation and Change

Discuss the concept of organizational innovation. Organizational innovation refers to adopting a new idea or behavior for the organization. It differs from change, which may adopt existing ideas to move from state A to state B. Innovation is the first attempt to put a previously unknown idea into practice. Distinguish invention (theoretical emergence) from innovation (practical application). “Disruptive innovation” destabilizes a prior situation with a new product or service concept.

Factors supporting innovation include availability of resources, frequent communication across units and diverse viewpoints, a flexible structure, and cohesive integrated work groups.

Definition of Organizational Change and Key Aspects

Definition of organizational change and defining aspects. Organizational change is a difference in the form, quality, or state of an organizational entity over time. Distinguish between content (what changes) and process (how change occurs). Change can be local or systemic, incremental (evolutionary) or radical (revolutionary). Adaptive conceptions emphasize firm adaptation to external changes with strategic leadership central; ecological conceptions emphasize environmental selection of best-suited organizations.

Knowledge as a Strategic Factor

How and why knowledge became strategic for organizations. Since the early 1970s, environmental crises, globalization, and increasing complexity led to dematerialization of value creation and a shift toward use value and differentiated services. This process increased the importance of information and the capacity to produce, process, and distribute it, elevating knowledge and communication as strategic determinants of success. Knowledge became a strategic factor capable of creating lasting competitive advantage via human resources. Organizations investing in knowledge and competencies and maximizing knowledge-related efficiency are termed learning organizations.

Cultural and Cognitive Approaches to Learning

Discuss the cultural approach to learning. The cultural approach conceives organizations as cultural entities and practice-based; development is generated through practice and social interaction. Organizational learning is a category of activities achievable by a group: what is known becomes operational when a group acts in a unified way. Learning is socially constructed and culture shapes interpretation of ambiguous information. Knowledge becomes practical—”knowing” through action rather than a possession.

Cognitive Approach to Learning

Discuss the cognitive approach to learning. The cognitive perspective emphasizes information processing for decision-making and includes individual cognitive learning and organizational cognitive learning. Individual learning focuses on members acquiring knowledge that leads to organizational learning. Organizational cognitive learning applies similar concepts at the organizational level. Transition between individual and organizational levels is central: organizational learning occurs when cognitive structures change and become independent of single individuals.

Aspects of Organizational Learning

Discuss the various aspects of organizational learning. Organizational learning is a multilevel process of change in cognition and action, rooted in and influenced by the organization. It includes individual, group, and organizational processes. Since the 1990s, practical applications aimed at promoting learning (coaching, supervision) have grown. Learning organizations invest in knowledge and competencies, create climates encouraging learning, extend learning culture to clients and suppliers, and make intellectual capital central. Learning can be formal (structured practices) or informal (observation); organizational learning occurs when cognitive maps change and are independent of single individuals.

Nonaka’s SECI Model of Knowledge Creation

Discuss Nonaka’s organizational knowledge (SECI model). The SECI model states that organizational knowledge is created through a spiral process involving interaction between explicit knowledge (communicable and context-independent) and tacit knowledge (rooted in action and context), at individual, group, and organizational levels. Conversion between tacit and explicit knowledge occurs through four modes:

Socialization (tacit → tacit): sharing experiences through observation, imitation, and practice to create tacit knowledge such as mental models and technical skills.
Externalization (tacit → explicit): expressing tacit knowledge through explicit concepts via communication and reflection, generating meta-learning.
Combination (explicit → explicit): systematizing explicit knowledge by combining different bodies of knowledge (meetings, conferences, databases).
Internalization (explicit → tacit): translating explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge through practice, expanding individual potential actions.

Through socialization of newly internalized tacit knowledge, the virtuous cycle of organizational knowledge creation restarts.

The Role of the Customer in Quality

The role of the customer in organizational quality. Judgments of good or poor quality depend on the customer’s perception of the service delivered compared to expectations. Service quality is the degree of discrepancy between customers’ expectations or desires and their perceptions. Quality can be viewed as:

Expected quality: characteristics a customer considers adequate relative to preferences or value systems.
Designed quality: what the organization intends to achieve.
Delivered quality: associated with the product or service during delivery.
Perceived quality: the quality the customer finds in the product or service provided.
Compared quality: the quality the customer evaluates by comparing with previous experiences.

Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction. If perceived quality is lower than expectations → negative quality → customer dissatisfaction. If perceived quality matches expectations → positive quality → customer satisfaction. If perceived quality exceeds expectations → latent quality → very high customer satisfaction.

Gender Approaches and Inequalities

Main approaches and differences in the study of gender inequalities.

Biological approach: attributes gender inequalities to biological differences and evolutionary or physiological causes.
Socio-cultural approach: through imitation and role modeling, children internalize gendered behaviors; organizations reproduce inequalities via mechanisms like devaluation of “women’s work” and role segregation.
Psychoanalytic approach: (e.g., Paula Nicolson) organizational cultures may be infused with masculine logic reproducing Oedipal dynamics and different masculine/feminine experiences.
Poststructuralist approach: gender is performative; repetition normalizes gendered behavior. Queer, poststructural, and postfeminist theories emphasize that gender rules precede individuals and construct identity through discourse.

Birth of the Gender Issue in Organizational Studies

Birth of the “gender issue” in organizational studies. Gayle Rubin described the “sex–gender system” as processes transforming biological sexuality into socially organized gender roles. Organizations are gendered; concepts and practices within them are gendered. Until the 1960s, women’s numerical minority and acceptance of male organizational culture left gender differences largely invisible. As women’s presence increased and they sought leadership positions, gender differences were studied. In the 1970s, Gender Studies emerged as an interdisciplinary field. The Women in Management (WIM) perspective sought equality and appreciation of differences. Postmodern feminism (Butler) views the person as an emerging, fragmented subject constituted by language; identity is constructed through stories we tell. Gender is a repeated performative practice leading to normative behaviors. This perspective opened the path to queer theory, challenging binary divisions and identity norms.

Organizational Climate and Its Approaches

Definitions and main aspects of the climate construct + “climate for … something”. Organizational climate is a perceived description of the social work environment at a given moment—the “air you breathe” in a particular group or organization (Lewin spoke of a “social atmosphere”). It is contextual and dynamic and linked to job satisfaction, which represents affective evaluation of aspects of work. Climate can be analyzed by antecedents (individual, group, organizational), mediating factors (behaviors or practices), moderating factors (climate strength, individual differences, culture), and outcomes (satisfaction, commitment, performance, absenteeism). Scholars have examined climates for ethics, safety, creativity, and stress risk.

What are the four approaches to the study of climate?

Structural approach: Climate is an objective manifestation of organizational structure, measurable through distinct attributes. It does not fully explain relationships with culture or structure or the diversity of climates.
Perceptual approach: Climate originates within individuals who perceive and interpret context, producing psychological climate.
Interactive approach: Synthesizing structural and perceptual views, individuals symbolically interact in everyday practices to create shared perceptions that give rise to climate; climate then affects practices.
Cultural approach: A multilayered social perspective emphasizing how groups construct reality through organizational culture. Schein: cultures consist of basic assumptions developed to deal with integration and adaptation problems; climate is the superficial, changeable manifestation of deeper culture, visible in behavior patterns.