Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:53:13.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conflict and Complexity: Goal Diversity and Organizational Search Effectiveness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Michael D. Cohen
Michael D. Cohen*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is a long-standing concern in organization theory with the effect of conflict on search. This article uses a computer model of organizational decision making to demonstrate an effect called “search-enhancing conflict”: organizational decision-making performance when there are conflicting subgoals may be better than it would be if all subunits evaluated alternatives in terms of a single organizational goal.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 78 , Issue 2 , June 1984 , pp. 435 - 451
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allison, G.Essence of decision. Boston: Little Brown, 1971.Google Scholar
Argyris, C.Single loop and double loop models in research on decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1976, 21, 363–375.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R.Schema theory: an information processing model of perception and cognition. American Political Science Review, 1973, 65, 1248–1266.Google Scholar
Beyer, J.Ideologies, values, and decisionmaking in organizations. In Nystrom, P. C. & Starbuck, W. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design. Vols. 1 & 2. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D.Documentation of an organizational modelling system. IPPS Discussion Paper #151, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, 1981. (a)Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D.Experimental materials for simulating municipal budgetary organizations. IPPS Discussion Paper #160, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, 1981. (b)Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D.The power of parallel thinking. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1981, 1, 285–306. (c)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coser, L.The functions of social conflict. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1956.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G.A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1963.Google Scholar
Dantzig, G.Linear programming and extensions. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
Day, R., & Groves, T. (Eds.), Adaptive economic models. New York: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Emery, R., & Trist, E.The causal texture of organizational environment. Human Relations, 1965, 18, 21–32.Google Scholar
George, A.The case for multiple advocacy in making foreign policy. American Political Science Review, 1972, 67, 751–785.Google Scholar
Goodin, R., & Waldner, I.Thinking big, thinking small, and not thinking at all. Public Policy, 1979, 27, 1–29.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B.How organizations learn and unlearn. In Nystrom, P. C. & Starbuck, W. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design, Vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Hedberg, B., Nystrom, P., & Starbuck, W.Camping on seesaws: prescriptions for a self-designing organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1976, 21, 41–65.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J.Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: Little Brown, in press.Google Scholar
March, J. G.Bounded rationality, ambiguity and the engineering of choice. Bell Journal of Economics, 1978, 9, 587–610.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Olsen, J.Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1976.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Simon, H.Organizations. New York: Wiley, 1958.Google Scholar
Mitroff, I., & Emshoff, J.On strategic assumptionmaking: a dialectical approach to policy and planning. Academy of Management Review, 1979, 4, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R., & Winter, S.An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Simon, H.Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1972.Google Scholar
Nystrom, P. C., & Starbuck, W.Handbook of organizational design. Vols. 1&2. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Olsen, J.Integrated organizational participation in government. In Nystrom, P. C. & Starbuck, W. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design. Vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A behavioral model of rational choice. In Simon, H., Models of man. New York: Wiley, 1958.Google Scholar
Simon, H.On the concept of organizational goal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1964, 9, 1–20.Google Scholar
Simon, H.The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Taylor, S.Making bureaucracies think: the environmental impact statement strategy of administrative reform. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Thompson, J. D.Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
Walker, J. L.The diffusion of knowledge, policy communities, and agenda setting: the relationship of knowledge and power. In Tropman, J. E., Dluhy, M., and Lind, R. (Eds.), New strategic perspective on social policy. New York: Pergamon Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Weick, K.The social psychology of organizing. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, A.The politics of the budgetary process. Boston: Little Brown, 1964.Google Scholar
Winter, S.Optimization and evolution in theory of the firm. In Day, R. & Groves, T. (Eds.), Adaptive economic models. New York: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.