Summary Comparative Management
Introduction to the approaches to comparative international management
Universalistic theories = claim that the phenomena of management and organization are subject to the same universal ‘laws’ everywhere in the world. It tends to predict that cross-national differences in management and organization will disappear in the future. Driving force is globalization. (e.g. contingency theory)
Particularistic theories = posit that organization and management in different countries can differ fundamentally, and that different explanations are necessary for different countries. It tends to predict that cross-national differences in management and organization will persist. (e.g. cultural and institutional approaches)
Contingency theory = (Hickson:) we can only start to attribute features to culture when we have made sure that relations between variables, are stable between cultures.
Structural contingency theory = given similar circumstances, the structure of an organization (= the basic patterns of control, coordination and communication), can be expected to be very much the same wherever it is located. Organizations must structure in responses to a series of demands or contingencies, posed by the scale/size of the operation, the technology employed and the environment within which operations take place.
Hierarchy/mechanistic
Routine operations
Narrow and specialized tasks
Decision-making is centralized and detailed
Hierarchy: steep, many layers
Precise work descriptions and procedures
Stable environment
Mass production
Size: large
Organic
Situations of high task uncertainty
Unstable environment
Innovation
Single product and process production
Size: small(er)
Broad and enriched tasks
Indicative work description and results
Decision-making is decentralized
Hierarchy: flat, few layers
Strengths contingency theory:
Straightforward
Highly standardized methodology
Multivariate analysis
Weaknesses contingency theory:
It has never provided an adequate explanation why the
Universalistic theories = claim that the phenomena of management and organization are subject to the same universal ‘laws’ everywhere in the world. It tends to predict that cross-national differences in management and organization will disappear in the future. Driving force is globalization. (e.g. contingency theory)
Particularistic theories = posit that organization and management in different countries can differ fundamentally, and that different explanations are necessary for different countries. It tends to predict that cross-national differences in management and organization will persist. (e.g. cultural and institutional approaches)
Contingency theory = (Hickson:) we can only start to attribute features to culture when we have made sure that relations between variables, are stable between cultures.
Structural contingency theory = given similar circumstances, the structure of an organization (= the basic patterns of control, coordination and communication), can be expected to be very much the same wherever it is located. Organizations must structure in responses to a series of demands or contingencies, posed by the scale/size of the operation, the technology employed and the environment within which operations take place.
Hierarchy/mechanistic
Routine operations
Narrow and specialized tasks
Decision-making is centralized and detailed
Hierarchy: steep, many layers
Precise work descriptions and procedures
Stable environment
Mass production
Size: large
Organic
Situations of high task uncertainty
Unstable environment
Innovation
Single product and process production
Size: small(er)
Broad and enriched tasks
Indicative work description and results
Decision-making is decentralized
Hierarchy: flat, few layers
Strengths contingency theory:
Straightforward
Highly standardized methodology
Multivariate analysis
Weaknesses contingency theory:
It has never provided an adequate explanation why the