Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Resurrection of Taxonomy to Aid the Development of Middle Range Theories of Organizational Behavior

  • Chapter
Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations

Abstract

Since the publication of Katz and Kahn’s The Social Psychology of Organizations (1966) and Thompson’s Organizations in Action (1967), the open systems model has dominated the thinking of scholars interested in organization theory. Although a number of authors, such as Scott (1961), had discussed the systems view of organizations before 1966, Katz and Kahn’s book was the first major exemplar of the systems model, and the one probably most often cited since then in connection with the systems paradigm. For Katz and Kahn, the stated purpose of applying the systems model to organizations was to facilitate the integration of so-called “macro” and “micro” concepts, thereby fostering some commonality of terms and concepts. Further, they hoped that the systems model would escape a commonly alleged fault of earlier approaches to the study of social organization, namely, a tendency to rely on analogies and metaphors that were not entirely appropriate (Katz and Kahn, 1966: 9).

Article Note

Reprinted from “The Resurrection of Taxonomy to Aid the Development of Middle Range Theories of Organizational Behavior” by C.C. Pinder and L.F. Moore in Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1, by permission of Administrative Science Quarterly. © 1979 by Cornell University. We are grateful to Hari Das, Peter Frost, David Hayes, George Gorelik, Bill McKelvey and, Louis Pondy for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. We also thank Brian Scrivener of the University of British Columbia Press for his invaluable copyediting assistance before the article was accepted for publication.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, J. Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, 67, 422–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alderfer, C. Change processes in organization. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H.E., and Herker, D. Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review, 1977, 2, 217–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S.W., and Gordon, G. An entrepreneurial theory of formal organization, part 1. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1966, 11, 315–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behling, O. Some problems in the philosophy of science of organizations. Academy of Management Review, 1978, 5, 193–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigelow, J. Evolution and middle range theories: Toward a matrix of organizational modes. In Larry F. Moore and Craig C. Pinder (Eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations, Martinus Nijhoff, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billings, R.S., Klimoski, R.J., and Breaugh, J.A. The impact of a change in technology on job characteristics: A quasi-experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1977, 22, 318–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P.M., and Scott, W.R. Formal Organizations. San Francisco: Chandler, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burack, E.H. Aspects of the state of the art in systems theory: Accomplishments and challenges. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 1975, 6, 101–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T. The comparative study of organizations. In Victor Vroom (Ed.), Methods of Organizational Research. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplow, T. Principles of Organization. N.Y.: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L.J., and Gleser, G.C. Assessing similarity between profiles. Psychological Bulletin, 1953, 50, 456–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L.E., and Engelstad, P.H. Unit operations in socio-technical systems: Analysis and design. Working Paper No. T-894, London: Tavistock, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dearborn, D.C., and Simon, H.A. Selective perception: A note on the departmental identification of executives. Sociometry, 1958, 21, 140–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drexler, J. A. Organizational climate: Its homogeneity within organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 38–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dvorak, B.J. Advantages of the multiple cut-off method. Personnel Psychology, 1956, 9, 45–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations. New York: Free Press, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, F. A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University Press, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, J. Sociological Theory Construction. Hinsdale, 111.: Dryden Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., and Donnelly, J.M. Organizations (rev. ed.). Dallas: Business Publications, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. Social comparison processes in organizations. In Barry Staw and Gerald R. Salancik (Eds.),New Direction in Organizational Behavior. Chicago: St. Clair, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. New York: Free Press, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, B.M. What are your organization’s objectives? Human Relations, 1965, 18, 195–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Personal correspondence with authors, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grusky, O. Managerial succession and organizational effectiveness. American Journal of Sociology, 1963, 69, 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The effects of succession: A comparative study of military and business organization. In Oscar Grusky and G. Miller (Eds.), The Sociology of Organization. New York: Free Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, J.E., Hall, R.G., and Johnson, N.J. Toward an empirically derived taxonomy of organizations. In R. V. Bowers (Ed.), Studies on Behavior in Organizations. Athens, Ga.: University Press, 1966, 157–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R.H., Haas, J.E., and Johnson, N.J. An examination of the Blau-Scott and Etzioni typologies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1967, 12, 118–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R.H. Organizations: Structure and Process. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helson, H. Adaptation Level Theory. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C.G. Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: Free Press, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heydebrand, W.V. (Ed.). Comparative Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G.C. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, H.R. A new conceptualization of source of organizational climate. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1976, 27, 95–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kast, F., and Rosenzweig, J.B. General systems theory: Applications for organization and management. Academy of Management Journal, 1972, 15, 447–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., and Kahn, R. The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J.R. Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: A review, critique, and proposal. Administrative Science quarterly, 1976, 27, 571–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. R. How to deal with resistance to change. Harvard Business Review, 1969, 47, 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P.R., and Lorsch, J. Organization and Environment. Homewood, 111.: Irwin, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leach, E.R. Rethinking Anthropology. New York: Humanities Press, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, S. The effects of changes in roles on the attitudes of role occupants. Human Relations, 1956, 9, 385 - 402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, F.C., and Williams, L.K. Organizational impact of white collar automation. In L.E. Davis and J.C. Taylor (Eds.), Design of Jobs. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin, 1972, 83–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. Principles of Systematic Zoology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. Guidelines for the empirical classification of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1975, 20, 509–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organizational Systematics. Book in progress, 1978(a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Organizational systematics: Taxonomic lessons from biology. Management Science, 1978, 24, 1428–1440 (b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Melcher, A.J. Theory and application of systems theory: Its promises, problems and realizations. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 1975, 6, 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milburn, T.W., Negandhi, A.R., and Robey, D. Evaluating systems theory concepts: Comments. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 1975, 6, 11–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, E.J., and Rice, A.K. Systems of Organization. London: Tavistock, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, N.C., and Reimer, E. The experimental change of a major organizational variable. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956, 52, 120–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review, 1961, 32, 194–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, C. C. Facets of a movement toward middle range theory in organizational behavior. Unpublished working paper, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, University of British Columbia, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, C.C., and Moore, L.F. (Eds.). Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. Martinus Nijhoff, 1979(a).

    Google Scholar 

  • The inevitability of multiple paradigms and the resultant need for middle range analysis in organization theory. In Larry F. Moore and Craig C. Pinder (Eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. 1979(b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, P.R., and Pinder, C.C. A cluster-analytic approach to the study of organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1972, 8, 408–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pondy, L.R., and Boje, D.M. Bringing mind back in: Paradigm development as a frontier problem in organization theory. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Illinois, Department of Business Administration, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pondy, L.R., and Mitroff, I. Beyond open system models of organization. In B.M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich, Ct.: JAI. 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., and Hinings, C.R. An empirical taxonomy of work organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969(a), 14, 115–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., Hinings, C.R., and Turner, C. Dimensions of organizational structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1968, 13, 65–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The context of organization structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969(b), 14, 91–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritzer, G. Sociology: A multiple paradigm science. The American Sociologist, 1975, 10, 156–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, H.H. Biological Systematics. Reading, Ma.: Addison-Wesley, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. Organizational Psychology ( 2nd ed. ). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice- Hall, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W.G. Organization theory: An overview and an appraisal. Academy of Management Journal, 1961, 4, 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sells, S.B. Toward a taxonomy of organizations. In W.W. Cooper, H.J. Leavitt, and M.W. Shelley (Eds.), New Perspectives in Organizational Research. New York: Wiley, 1964, 515–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneath, P.H.A., and Sokal, R.R. Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco: W.G. Freeman, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Susman, G.I. The impact of automation on work group autonomy and task specialization. Human Relations, 1970, 23, 567–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thayer, F. General system(s) theory: The promise that could not be kept. Academy of Management Journal, 1972, 15, 481–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J.D. Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trist, E.L., and Bamforth, K.W. Some social and psychological consequences of the longwall method of coal-getting. Human Relations, 1951, 4, 3–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M.L. A political approach to organizations: A review and rationale. Academy of Management Review, 1977, 2, 206–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Udy, S.H. The comparative analysis of organizations. In James G. March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965, 678–709.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Riper, P.P. Organizations: Basic issues and a proposed typology. In R.V. Bowers, (Ed.), Studies on Behavior in Organizations. Athens, Ga.: University of Georgia Press, 1966, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V., and Yetton, P. Leadership and Decision Making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1973. Weick, K.E. The Social Psychology of Organizing. Reading, Ma.: Addison- Wesley, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middle range theories of social systems. Behavioral Science, 1974, 19, 357–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1976, 21, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enactment Processes in organizations. In Barry M. Staw and Gerald R. Salancik (Eds.), New Directions in Organizational Behavior. Chicago: St. Clair Press, 1977, 267–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, J. Industrial Organization. Glasgow: Oxford University Press, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaleznik, A. Book review of The Social Psychology of Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1967, 2, 682–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of British Columbia, Canada

    Craig C. Pinder

Authors
  1. Craig C. Pinder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Larry F. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The University of British Columbia, Canada

    Craig C. Pinder  & Larry F. Moore  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1980 Martinus Nijhoff Publishing

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pinder, C.C., Moore, L.F. (1980). The Resurrection of Taxonomy to Aid the Development of Middle Range Theories of Organizational Behavior. In: Pinder, C.C., Moore, L.F. (eds) Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8733-3_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8733-3_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-009-8735-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-8733-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation