The Above Picture is Related Image of Another Journal



Barnard College – Columbia University, US has reference to this Academic Journal, ORGANIZATION SIZE ASTON STUDY Size is the major determinant of structure Forty-six organizations Increased size is associated alongside greater specialization in addition to formalization ?An increased scale of operation increases the frequency of recurrent events in addition to the repetition of decisions,? which makes standardization preferable. CHILD & MANSFIELD Organization size is related positively so that specialization Organization size is related positively so that formalization Organization size is related positively so that vertical span Organization size is related negatively so that centralization

 Frauenfelder, Mark Barnard College - Columbia University


Related University That Contributed for this Journal are Acknowledged in the above Image


CHILD & MANSFIELD, CONT?D ?Larger organizations are more specialized, have more rules, more documentation, more extended hierarchies, in addition to a greater decentralization of decision-making further down such hierarchies.? ??the impact of size on these dimensions expanded at a decreasing rate as size increased.? MEYER STUDY Current documentation of the relationship between size in addition to structure does not imply causation. Longitudinal study of 194 city, county, in addition to state departments of finance over a five year period. ?one cannot underestimate the impact of size on other characteristics of organizations MEYER, CONT?D Relationship is uni-directional (size caused structure, but not reverse) The impact of other variables disappeared when size was controlled

CHRIS ARGYRIS Blau study sample unique ? civil service, budget limitations, distinct geographical boundaries, predetermined staff sizes, in addition to influenced primarily by regulations Managerial discretion in bureaus must follow traditional management theories regarding task specialization, unity of command, span of control, in addition to so forth MAYHEW & ASSOCIATES Computer simulation of differentiation possible in consideration of each level of organization Concluded Blau?s findings of a relationship between size in addition to complexity were a mathematical certainty when equal probabilities were assigned so that all possible structural combinations ALDRICH STUDY Reanalyzed Aston group data Proposed alternate & equally plausible interpretations r.e.-technology causes structure, size is the result

4 – Usable by anyone . . . . . . . . . . . . Asking a question should not change the answer! . .

ASTON REPLICATION Replication by some Aston group members alongside 14 of original sample Partial longitudinal study Size generally decreased over time Structure measure increased ? counter so that original findings HALL & ASSOCIATES Studied 75 highly diverse organizations Size 6-9000+ employees Business, governmental, religious, educational, in addition to penal organizations Result mixed ? ?neither complexity nor formalization can be implied from organizational size.? HALL, CONT?D Sided alongside Aldrich ? ?structure causes size? Findings were very inconsistent, do not demonstrate conclusions.

GEERAERTS STUDY 142 small & medium-sized businesses Size-structure relationship true in consideration of professionally-managed organization, not in consideration of owner-managed firms Increases in size were associated alongside more horizontal differentiation, more formalization, in addition to more delegation of decision-making only in firms controlled by professional managers GENERAL CONCLUSIONS Size appears so that impact complexity at a decreasing rate Size in addition to formalization appear positively correlated Increases in size lead so that decentralization, particularly in professionally-managed organizations HOW BIG IS BIG? Any answer is only an approximation Large organizations tend so that have 2000 or more employees When an organization has 2000 employees, additions in size have minimal impact on structure A change in size will have its greatest impact on structure when the organization is small

PARKINSON?S LAW Work expands so as so that fill the time available in consideration of its completion There need be little or no relationship between the work so that be done in addition to the size of the staff so that which it may be assigned ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT There is evidence in consideration of a positive relationship between size in addition to the size of the administrative component There is evidence in consideration of a negative relationship between size in addition to the size of the administrative component MORE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT Most likely, a curvilinear relationship between size in addition to the size of the administrative component. Increasingly large in small so that medium organizations, in addition to decreasingly large in large so that very large organizations.

ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT CURVE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPONENT, CONT?D There is a limit at which, even in large organizations, there will be a need in consideration of increasing administrative components. Varies greatly by industry or type of organization. SIZE AND SATISFACTION

ORGANIZATION SIZE AND DESIGN Smaller Organizations: Less job specialization Less standardization More centralization Larger Organizations: More job specialization More standardization More centralization INDUSTRY-SIZE MODEL INDUSTRY TECHNOLOGY SIZE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

Frauenfelder, Mark General Manager; Senior Vice President

Frauenfelder, Mark is from United States and they belong to General Manager; Senior Vice President and work for KZON-FM in the AZ state United States got related to this Particular Article.

Journal Ratings by Barnard College – Columbia University

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by and short form of this particular Institution is US and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.