Organization Theory PDF

ORGANIZATION THEORY Moe's Structural Choice Theory Moe's structural choice theory is based on the idea that individuals make choices within a given institutional framework. He argues against positivist theories that downplay the role of politics in shaping these institutions (Terry Moe, 2014). In de...

ORGANIZATION THEORY Moe's Structural Choice Theory Moe's structural choice theory is based on the idea that individuals make choices within a given institutional framework. He argues against positivist theories that downplay the role of politics in shaping these institutions (Terry Moe, 2014). In developing his theory, Moe emphasizes the importance of social choices made by presidents and legislators. He examines case studies to illustrate how they actively participate in the politics of structural choice (Moe, 1989; Moe, 1990). By highlighting these examples, Moe challenges the notion that political institutions are simply products of rational design or functional necessity. Instead, he emphasizes that individuals' self-interests and power struggles play a significant role in shaping institutional arrangements. Emergence of Political Institutions The structural choice theory offers valuable insights into how political institutions emerge. It recognizes that individual preferences and social interactions are crucial factors determining their form and function (Terry Moe, 2014). According to this theory, actors within a political system engage in strategic behavior to promote their interests. They consider existing institutional constraints but also seek opportunities for change when it benefits them politically. For example, presidents and legislators may strategically use their positions to influence the design of political institutions in ways that favor their power or policy goals (Moe, 1990). This perspective highlights the agency of political actors in shaping institutions, challenging the view that they are passive recipients of institutional constraints. Problems with the Positivist Theory Moe criticized the positivist approach when it comes to understanding political institutions. He argued that positivism relies heavily on observable data and assumes that political behavior can be explained solely by rational calculations. However, Moe argues that this approach neglects the inherently political nature of institutional choices. Institutions are not mere products of functional necessity; they emerge from complex interactions among actors driven by self-interest and power dynamics (Terry Moe, 2014). By focusing solely on observable data and ignoring these underlying dynamics, positivist theories fail to capture the full complexity of how political institutions come into being. Public Organizations as Organically Hierarchal and Structurally Participatory According to Christensen's perspective, public organizations are characterized by being multifunctional with politically elected leadership rather than operating solely in a market context (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). Free Riding, Individual Incompetence and spillover effect In terms of free riding in public organizations, Christensen defines it as individuals benefiting from collective efforts without contributing their fair share (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). Individual incompetence refers to situations where some individuals lack the required skills or knowledge to perform effectively within a public organization (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). The spillover effect occurs when changes or decisions made within one part of a public organization impact other areas or functions within that organization (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). Difference between Logic of Appropriateness and Logic of Consequence Christensen highlights two different logics that are relevant in public organizations: the logic of appropriateness and the logic of consequence. The logic of appropriateness refers to decision-making based on pre-existing norms, values, and rules within a particular organizational context (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). On the other hand, the logic of consequence involves decision-making guided by expected outcomes and consequences (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). These logics influence how decisions are made and policies are implemented within public organizations. Bounded Rationality in Public Organizations In discussing bounded rationality, Christensen argues that decision-makers within these organizations face cognitive limitations that prevent them from fully analyzing all available information and alternatives (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). This concept acknowledges that individuals have limited time, resources, and cognitive capacity to make completely rational decisions (Christensen & Laegreid, 2007). Bounded rationality impacts decision-making processes within public organizations and can lead to suboptimal outcomes or compromises. POLITICAL CULTURE 3 Types of Political Culture Parochial - Citizens are remotely aware of a central government Subject - Citizens are subject to the government Participatory - Citizens believe that they are affected by the government and are involved in it. Constituent Elements of Political Culture Beliefs - Attitudes that are ingrained in a culture Symbols - Messages that are involved in cultural discourse Values - Actions that are manifested by organizations Condorcet's Representative Government Condorcet Paradox - Condorcet Paradox said that choices are not transitive. An individual's choice is not transferred to a group but it is merely giving in to what the collective good is. Representative Democracy and Representative Government; what's the difference? Representative Government is a government by the opinion of the many while representative democracy is a government by majority rule. In the Philippines, it is a representative democracy on paper but because of the irrationality of the majority, it is technically just a representative government. How did Banlaoi describe the Philippine state? Banlaoi described the Philippine state as both a premature and weak state. It is a premature state because it was born before reaching the full term of statehood. Meaning, it became a state not through the development of a cohesive national consciousness, but through the actions of its former colonial masters. On the other hand, it’s weakness stems from its lack of relative autonomy from patriarchal interests of dominant Filipino Social classes, powerful political families and clans, and influential landed elite, and wealthy Filipino capitalists. What is a strong state? A strong state is a state that has already reached statehood. 1. The ends and purpose of government have become settled and founded on a significant ideological consensus (We can only say that a state is mature and strong if the society is strong; we have to establish a society before we can organize ourselves as a state. Established society: GB, CHINA, JAPAN Philippines: nauna ang state) 2. Most social groups have been successfully assimilated 3. Secessionism no longer constitutes a major goal of minorities (This is a qualitative narrative; no segment of population should have an inclination to separate from the government because this reflect a sense of insecurity e.g. Muslim groups, OFW) 4. Leaders are selected on the basis of a regular procedure like elections; No political dynasties (This is not true for Ph. There is no clause in the constitution that prohibits political dynasty. Elitist capitalism, patronage politics) 5. Military and policy organizations remain under effective civilian control 6. The mores of governance preclude personal enrichment (moral tendency to serve the people than their personal interest) Why does the colonial history of the Philippines matter in understanding the maturity of the country as a state? It’s better to be colonized by the British than the Spaniards. Why? The full authority of the Spaniards was given to the monarch so when they colonized states the representatives of Spain had the authority given by the monarch. The Church's authority at that time is God’s will. Thus, Indio mentality. Manipulations of Religion 2 signs a country is poor: 1. Lot of lottery stations 2. Lots of NGOs Why is it that statehood came first for us rather than society? The Philippines strived to become a state not because of the result of our natural blossoming of national consciousness but as a result of an overwhelming exasperation with the three centuries of oppression under the Spanish colonial administration, a half century of American resentment, and a four year colonial interruption of the Japanese. What are the requisites of a state? Territory Population Government Sovereignty What can we learn from the Chinese Society? Communist Party of China; They are already well established as a society. What is the Confucianism society of China that makes them more mature to us? Loyalty Filial piety Honor Quality The only way to unite China and save it to poverty is through Consolidation of society “The problem is that we are not homogenous” “We live in a very pluralistic society (178+ political dynasties)” Ph = weak state and society China = strong society and weak state “ In the realm of statehood we are better than Taiwan because we are considered as a democratic functional state but notwithstanding the status of our democratic state, Taiwan is still way better.” “We haven’t really matured as a society that is able to assimilate all of our identities into one” Do you know what’s hard with having a multiparty system? There is no continuity. Why is it that the pol dynasty has a stronghold of all our political activities as a nation? Why is it that you have more leverage? Kinship, there is generational resilience. You are protecting your generations. “THE IDEAL IS A STRONG SOCIETY AND STRONG STATE” How do we achieve that? Institutionalize your culture, and politically organize. “ Your political stature is determined by your closeness in the parokya” (3rd meeting notes) Inclusionary and exclusionary tendency of a democratic government What is exclusion and inclusion according to Rhodes? Exclusion and inclusion is critically about the choices that are made by persons exercising some administrative authority or some judicial authority at a lower or operational level. Exclusion and inclusion is about minority and majority groups. “ORGANIZATION ARE EXCELLENT AT EXCLUSION AND POOR AT INCLUSION” WHAT ELEMENTS IMPOSES EXCLUSION OR INCLUSION? WHAT TRIGGERS EXCLUSION AND INCLUSION? WHY DO THE STATE FELT LIKE THEY HAVE THE POWER TO CREATE OR INCLUDE OR CREATE MAJORITIES AND MINORITIES IN A SOCIETY? WHEN WE SAY THAT AN ADMINISTRATOR IS THE ONE OR THE MAJOR DECIDING AUTHORITY OF WHO GETS TO BE INCLUDED OR EXCLUDED, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE POLITICAL AUTHORITY OF THE STATE, AND FROM THAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND…. 1. POLITICAL POWER 2. POLITICAL AUTHORITY 3. POLITICAL LEGITIMACY 4. POLITICAL CAPACITY TO FURTHER ANALYZE THE STATE OF EXCLUSION AND INCLUSION AND POSSIBLY HOW TO ACQUIRE POWER, WHO EXERCISES IT, AND IF IT IS LEGITIMATE. What is power? Power is the ability to control or influence What is Authority? Political authority is the recognition of one’s authority and power What is Legitimacy? Legitimacy is the recognition of the consenting individual to your rule What is Capacity? Having your consenting individual to judge your governance Can Power be illegal? Power can be illegal because this means power is acquired through different sources. It is inherent and can be illegal because it has so many sources of power and can be subjective How do you know if power is not legitimate? There is no consent nor recognition Can authority be illegal? Authority cannot be illegal because it is purely based on consent. What makes authority and power totally different? Their sources, where their influence and control comes from. What makes authority legitimate all the time and what makes power illegitimate sometimes? Consent of Individuals. I have the power but I don’t have the authority Vs. I have the authority but I don’t have the power TYPES OF POWER : 5 BASES OF POWER 1. Expert - Expert power is derived from an individual's knowledge, skills, or expertise in a particular domain. 2. Referent - Referent power is derived on preferences, likes, dislikes, or affinity. 3. Reward - Reward power is derived from the ability to provide rewards or incentives. 4. Legitimate -This type of power is based on formal authority and position. Coercive 5. Coercive power - involves the use of punishment or negative consequences. Which do you think is the most positive in our society? Expert and Legitimate Power. Types of Political Authority: Traditional Authority: ● Source: legitimized by long standing custom ● Leadership style : Historic Personality ● Ex: Patriarchy, Royal families with no political power but social influence, political dynasty, Legal-Rational Authority: ● Source: Authority resides on the office of the person ● Leadership style : Bureaucratic officials ● Ex: US presidency, Congress, Modern parliamentary government, taxation, monetary and fiscal policy ● You rely on the limitations of the law to impose the rules of the citizens Charismatic Authority: ● Source: Based on leader’s personal qualities ● Leadership style : Dynamic personality ● Ex: Napoleon, Jesus Christ, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr. , Gandhi, Silicon valley (they treat the products with so much personality so you can buy more to them), Hollywood, Kpop “Filipinos are inherently emotional so we are vulnerable to charismatic leaders” Which Authority is most dominant in our culture? (Double Helix of Rhodes) Charismatic authority. Double helix which implies that democracy and charisma is not a good combination. Why is democracy and charisma not a good combination? The poison in it is the use of charisma in disguising it through empathy. Sources of legitimacy: Sources beyond recognition (if you are recognized, you are legitimate) This comes from the Hobbesian perspective where the attempt to rule without legitimacy is an attempt to rule with coercion. This means if you cannot get legitimacy just rule by coercion. ● Consent Why is consent important in establishing legitimacy? Legitimacy is based on consent. How is consent in political authority with the consent of political legitimacy? Consent to acquire political legitimacy requires an obligation under the law to deliver what you’ve promised. On the other hand, consent in political authority doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to give back or serve them. “A figure that recognizes himself as an authority is not obligated to serve you.” “It is possible to have authority but you have no legitimacy” ● ● ● Beneficial consequence- focuses on the utilitarian view. Public reason- means that the political conceptions of justice and what is fair is consolidated. Democratic approval - there is a consensus of the moral and religious aspect of what you instigated in the public. Interpret the relationship of a state’s political power, authority, legitimacy, participation, and civil society. Attempts at inclusion: (2 responses) 1. Counter attack or counter mobilization hypothesis 2. Entrapment Is it possible to be included in a society that is exclusionary? We can make political entrepreneurs out of them. —----------------------State is a working organization that requires structure and process. The Philippine state has three branches: legislative, executive, judiciary. The philippines’ type of governance is a representative or electoral democracy. What is the difference between government and governance? The government is a structure of legitimizing authority, governance is the process of legitimizing authority. Why is impartiality better than equality? Civil society checks the quality of government. So they have the responsibility to keep the state in check. [GOVERNANCE] Impartiality is not promoted by Representative democracy; it has values that are detrimental 1. Partisanship 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Rhetoric Person centered Ideological mobilization Ideological orientation Political loyalty Financially dependent on external sources State capacity (quality of government) Rothstein 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Impartiality Matter of factness Impersonal Neutrality Epistemic orientation Meritocracy Financially independent from external sources GDP vs. level of democracy Our levels of democracy is high (8) but gdp capita per growth is low Government revenue vs. level of democracy High level of democracy but the collection efficiency is very low. Level of democracy vs. control of corruption Control of corruption is lowest in PH When a representative democracy is introduced to a weak state, how do we manage it ? CIVIL SOCIETY