Organizational Pathology

Organizational Pathology

Our Maladaptation to Organizational Life

by

Steven M. Price

Copyright ©2019 Steven M. Price

All rights reserved

Thank you for downloading this ebook. This book remains the copyrighted property of the author and may not be redistributed to others for commercial or non-commercial purposes. If you enjoyed this book, please encourage your friends to download their own copy from their favorite authorized retailer. Thank you for your support.

Distributed by Smashwords

Ebook formatting by ebooklaunch.com

Table of Content

DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1: UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH AND PATHOLOGY

PART 2: INDIVIDUAL PATHOLOGIES

PART 3 : SITUATIONAL PATHOLOGIES

PART 4: INTERPERSONAL PATHOLOGIES

PART 5: ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT PATHOLOGIES

TOWARDS A NEW PATH

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

ENDNOTES

DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1: UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH AND PATHOLOGY

1.1 SELECTING AN ORGANIZATIONAL METAPHOR

1.2 UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH

1.3 UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

1.4 UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL PATHOLOGY

1.5 SURROGATES FOR ORGANIZATIONAL PATHOLOGY

1.6 THE MANIFESTATION OF PATHOLOGY

1.7 CLOSING THOUGHTS ON ORGANIZATIONAL HEALTH AND PATHOLOGY

PART 2: INDIVIDUAL PATHOLOGIES

2.1 UNDERSTANDING HUMAN NATURE

2.2 THE CONCEPT OF SELF

2.3 OUR ABILITY TO ADAPT

2.4 EXECUTIVE FUNCTION AND STRESS

2.5 THINKING FAST AND SLOW

2.6 THE CRITICAL RELATIONSHIPS

2.7 THE PATHOLOGY OF COGNITIVE CONTROL

2.8 THE PATHOLOGY OF OUR REACTIONS

2.9 WHAT DRIVES US?

2.10 SELF-REGULATION AND ADJUSTING OUR WORLD

2.11 SELF-CONTROL IN SOCIETY

PART 3 : SITUATIONAL PATHOLOGIES

3.1 NOT ENOUGH TIME OR RUNWAY

3.2 UNDERSTANDING RISK AND RESPONSE

3.3 THE LIFECYCLE MINDSET

3.4 PROCESS PARALYSIS

3.5 PROCEDURAL PARALYSIS

3.6 CRISIS MENTALITY

3.7 THE PROBLEMS WITH JOB DESIGN

PART 4: INTERPERSONAL PATHOLOGIES

4.1 OUR PROSOCIAL DISPOSITION

4.2 THE GROUPTHINK TRAP

4.3 THE PRESUMPTION OF TEAMS

4.4 THE DOMINANT COALITION

4.5 PERSONALITY AND TEMPERAMENT

4.6 THE COMMOTION OF EMOTION

4.7 BELIEFS AND VALUES

4.8 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

PART 5: ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT PATHOLOGIES

5.1 THE PATHOLOGY OF STRUCTURE

5.2 THE PATHOLOGY OF BUREAUCRACY

5.3 LEADERSHIP PATHOLOGY

5.4 PROCESS PATHOLOGY

5.5 ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND CLIMATE

5.6 ASSUMING CONVERSATION IS COMMUNICATION

5.7 ORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE

5.8 COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE

5.9 ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE

5.10 COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WORK BEHAVIORS

TOWARDS A NEW PATH

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Part 1: Understanding Organizational Health and Pathology

Every age develops its own peculiar forms of pathology, which express in exaggerated form its underlying character structure.

Christopher Lasch

Contemporary society is an organizational society and a society of organizations that enjoins individuals as participants, clients and customers, and citizens into a world of social and technological networks[1].

The social, political, and economic prominence of our organizations and institutions, has made them the core of commerce, the platform for governance, and the primary means of distributing goods and services. Arguably, we now depend upon organizations for our very existence.

Organizations are the focal point of our work, the coordinator of our workforce, and the foundation of the workplace. We each have a vested interest in the institutions and companies that comprise our organizational society because organizations are clearly the vanguard for identifying, solving, or preventing complex systems problems.

As Peter Drucker noted, society, community, and family are all conserving institutions. They try to maintain stability and to prevent, or at least to slow, change. Conversely, the modern organization is a destabilizer. It exists for the sole purpose of making knowledge productive, to drive innovation, and to create a customer.

The importance of organizations warrants an understanding of what constitutes a healthy organization, and those that are not. This is particularly true because there is no overarching theory of organizations.

Perhaps the complexity of the interactions and the dynamism of the environment make a uniform or universal approach impossible. However there are multiple theories that contribute to our understanding of specific domains and which strive to predict organizational behaviors[2] .

The lack of uniformity and consensus on organizational theory is largely due to the influence of managerial problems that have driven empirical research. The research remains fragmented and appears to be driven by paradigm proliferation. Thus far the focus on the ‘problem de jure’ has forced abandoning a cumulative theoretical base in favor of monopolizing differentiation[3].

The use of organizational pathology suggests there are conditions that prevent optimal, or at least ‘healthy’ operational performance. The notion of using an organic concept to describe organizations, versus being inanimate, allows us describe and discuss the conditions and symptoms we observe.

Part 1 outlines the concepts that will be used examine, explore, and expand our understanding of organizational health and pathology. In doing so, the intent is to develop a model for organizational assessment and analysis.

1.1 Selecting an Organizational Metaphor

Our fragmented organizational picture is largely a by-product of how we view organizations. The perception or impression we have about organizations dictates our analysis of them. One useful depiction of these ‘images’ are described as eight root metaphors[4].

These ‘images’ portray distinct impressions we form when thinking about organizational life. Each of these metaphors are examined to illustrate how different perspectives warrant different assessment pathways.

Organizations as machines borrows from the mechanistic paradigm and scientific management.

The industrial engineering or Tayloristic view of organizations suggests a chain of command will coordinate all the ‘parts of the organization’ thus worker and their job can be managed bureaucratically. Given the dynamic nature of the systems of society and those of an organizational presence, a machine paradigm of organizations is insufficient.

Organizations as brains relies upon a cybernetic paradigm that engages in self-regulating behaviors and maintaining steady states.

The notion of learning and knowledge sharing becomes a prominent theme for this image. Thus organizations are most effective if the right knowledge is always available at the right time. However, the organization itself does not possess a brain, but clearly indulges self-regulating behaviors. The cybernetic framework of feedback is highly operationalized in contemporary organizations.

Organizations as cultures is a powerful driver of what behaviors, symbols, and values prevail within the organization.

Culture is how we integrate internally and adapt to external impacts. Thus, culture serves to help us interpret and control our environment. But culture is only one variable among many that must be considered in evaluating any organization.

Organizations as political systems relies upon the observations that organizations are coalitions of people with divergent interests gather together for the sake of expediency.

There is a fair amount of political games played in corporate society. Of course divergent interests create conflict, along with power asymmetry, that we see with the dominant coalitions. Clearly there are political dynamics within organizations. And clearly, those dynamics can create awkward coalitions, or warring sides.

Organizations as psychic prisons suggest there is a certain lack of reality within organizational life because organizations are created unconsciously by dreams, desires, and fears of people involved in them.

The notion of preserving an image in our minds based on fantasy or what we believe the organizational reality to be, often times, places us in a ‘psychic’ prison. The image of prison does little to discuss pathology in a serious context. But it is worth mentioning that organizations can devolve significantly.

Organizations as flux and transformation leverage the organizational dynamics of change and the response or reactions to it are compelling.

We soon realize that within an organization no one person or procedure has full control over the direction of that organization. Thus the interdependence and ‘linkages’ bind those within the origination in different ways. The effects of rapid or incremental change are experienced differently, as is, the change response exhibited.

Organizations as instruments of domination confirms the marketplace is a powerful driver for the modern organization.

The ability of market makers and market leaders to dictate strategy and influence the internal dynamics of an organization is profound. The outfall of globalization is the most relevant example of domination or intimidation through wages, boundaries, and access. However, the use of domination as an explanatory metaphor digresses from the notion of pathology as a condition.

Organizations as living organisms occurs when organizations are viewed as living or open systems, their function depends upon the ebb and flow of resources.

Of all the metaphors presented, the notion of organizations as a living organism best exemplifies the intent of developing the pathology construct. The use of an organic, biological depiction conjures an image of life and vitality. Although the organization itself is not ‘alive’, it nonetheless, models and ecosystem with human inhabitants.

Although there are several potential metaphors that delve into the social and psychological aspects of organizations, the biological metaphor most aptly fits the larger narrative of organizations as ‘organic’ rather than ‘inanimate’.

The notion of organizations as a machine or a psychic prison casts them as horrible traps from which we cannot escape. Thus, we can easily see organizations as more a ‘living thing’ when we the see the interaction of people