Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Designing Organizations: Does Expertise Matter?

  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

From an organizational cognition standpoint, we approach organizational design as an ongoing creative sensemaking process. This study examined the role of expertise in the cognitive problem-solving patterns underlying design processes and the resulting organizational forms. The simulated problem elicited the mental models applied by naives, novices, and experts in designing an organization. The thinking-aloud protocol analysis revealed quantitative and qualitative expert/nonexpert differences in problem-solving strategies, the time spent on problem representation, and the justifications and difficulties expressed in the course of the design process. In addition, our results showed that naives created organizations consistent with mechanistic structures, while novices and experts created organizations consistent with organic structures. We discuss the implications of these findings for the understanding of the cognitive basis of organizational design and the development of effective training programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelson, B., & Soloway, E. (1988). A model of software design. In M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A. (1992). Domain knowledge: Evolving themes and emerging concerns. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baligh, H. H., Burton, R., & Obel, B. (1996). Organizational consultant: Creating a useable theory for organizational design. Management Science, 42(12), 1648–1662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M., & Franzak, F. J. (1988). The effects of organizational restructuring on frames of reference and cooperation. Journal of Management, 14(4), 579–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhargava, S., & Sinha, B. (1992). Prediction of organizational effectiveness as a function of type of organizational structure. The Journal of Social Psychology, 132(2), 223–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campion, M. A., & Stevens, M. J. (1988). A laboratory investigation of how people design jobs: Naive predispositions and the influence of training. In Best Paper Proceedings of the Academy of Management, pp. 261–265.

  • Daft, R. L. (2006). Organization theory and design (9th ed.). South-Western.

  • Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, D. V., & Lord, R. G. (1992). Expertise and problem categorization: The role of expert processing in organizational sense-making. Journal of Management Studies, 29(1), 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuBois, D., & Shalin, V. L. (1995). Adapting cognitive methods to real-world objectives: An application to job knowledge testing. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, & R. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessment (pp. 189–220). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Prospects and limits of the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. In K. A. Ericsson, & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commision (2000). The work of the future. New forms of work organisation and the information society. Luxembourg: Official Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, D. (1999). Cognitive approaches to new venture creation. International Journal of Management Reviews, 1(4), 415–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, J. D., & Hegarty, W. H. (1984). Decision maker’s beliefs about the causes and effects of structure: An exploratory study. Academy of Management Journal, 27(2), 271–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. R. (1995). Designing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (Eds.) (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R. (2000). Cognition and instruction: Mind, development, and community. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21(1), 123–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. (1988). Overview. In M. T. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, J., & Oldham, G. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, M., & Shirom, A. (1998). Organization design. In: M. Harrison, & A. Shirom (Eds.), Organizational diagnosis and assessment: Bridging theory and practice (pp. 175–207). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, R. R., Shadbolt, N. R., Burton, A. M., & Klein, G. (1995). Eliciting knowledge from experts: A methodological analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62(2), 129–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1991). Organizing work by adaptation. Organization Science, 2(1), 14–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1994). Mental models and probabilistic thinking. Cognition, 50, 189–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, W. F., McGee, V. E., & Slocum, J. W. (1997). Designing lateral organizations: An analysis of the benefits, costs and enablers of nonhierarchical organizational forms. Decision Sciences, 28(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, J. A. (1988). Expertise on the bench: Modeling magistrates’ judicial decision-making. In M.T. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 229–259). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. C., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Developing organizations: Diagnosis and action. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A. Y., & Stephens, C. U. (1993). Epilogue: Designing postindustrial organizations. In G. P. Huber, & W. H. Glick (Eds.), Organizational change and redesign. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, M. (1991). Dictionary of occupational titles (4th ed.). U.S. Government Printing Office.

  • Markman, A., & Gentner, D. R. (2001). Thinking. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 223–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Militello, L. (2001). Representing expertise. In E. Salas, & G. Klein (Eds.), Linking expertise and naturalistic decision making (pp. 245–262). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1991). Mintzberg and management. Madrid: Díaz de Santos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohrman, S. A., Cohen, S. G., & Mohrman, A. M. (1995). Designing team-based organizations: New forms for knowledge work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (1994). Teaching MBAs transformational thinking. In H. Tsoukas (Ed.), New thinking in organizational behaviour (pp. 40–51). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., von Krogh, G., & Voelpel, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge creation theory: Evolutionary paths and future advances. Organization Studies, 27(8), 1179–1208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oura, Y., & Hatano, G. (2001). The constitution of general and specific mental models of other people. Human Development, 44, 144–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pardo, A., & Ruiz, M. A. (2002). Handbook for data analysis with SPSS 11. Madrid: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, V. L., & Groen, G. J. (1991). The general and specific nature of medical expertise: A critical look. In K. A. Ericsson, & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 93–125). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peskin, J. (1998). Constructing meaning when reading poetry: An expert-novice study. Cognition and Instruction, 16(3), 235–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rico, R., & Fernández-Ríos, M. (2002). Organizational design as symbolic process. Psicothema, 14(2), 415–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rico, R., Fernández-Ríos, M., Rascado, P., & Sánchez-Manzanares, M. (2004). Implicit theories, organizational design, and effectiveness. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 38(1), 119–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, S. P. (1990). Organization theory: Structure, design and applications. NJ: Englewood Cliffs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse, W., & Morris, N. (1986). On looking into the black box: Prospects and limits in the search for mental models. Psychological Bulletin, 100(3), 349–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. (1997). Organizational behavior in the new organizational era. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 515–546.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Royer, J., Cisero, C., & Carlo, M. (1993). Techniques and procedures for assessing cognitive skills. Review of Educational Research, 63(2), 201–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1994). Teaching artistry through reflection-in-action. In H. Tsoukas (Ed.), New thinking in organizational behaviour (pp. 235–251). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill-structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (2002). Assessing patients’ needs: Does the same information guide expert and novice nurses? International Nursing Review, 49, 11–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). Organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vicente, K. J. (2000). Work domain analysis, task analysis: A difference that matters. In J. Schraagen, S. F. Chipman, & V. L. Shalin (Eds.), Cognitive Task Analysis (pp. 101–118). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J. F., & Post, T.A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 261–285). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J. F., Tyler, S. W., & Yengo, L. A. (1983). Individual differences in the solving of social science problems. Individual Differences in Cognition, 1, 205–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1993). Organizational redesign as improvisation. In G. P. Huber, & W. H. Glick (Eds.), Organizational change as redesign (pp. 346–379). NJ: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeitz, C. M. (1994). Expert-novice differences in memory, abstraction, and reasoning in the domain of literature. Cognition and Instruction, 12(4), 277–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, Universidad Carlos III, C/Madrid, 126, Getafe, Madrid, 28903, Spain

    Miriam Sánchez-Manzanares

  2. Department of Social Psychology and Methodology, Faculty of Psychology, Autónoma University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Ramón Rico

  3. Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Francisco Gil

Authors
  1. Miriam Sánchez-Manzanares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ramón Rico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francisco Gil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miriam Sánchez-Manzanares.

Appendix

Appendix

Coding scheme

Category

Definition

Explore

Read or reproduce the information presented (instructions, magnetic cards)

Goals

Describe the future states comprising the intermediate (sub-goals) and final (overall goal) objectives pursued through an action or set of actions

Planning

Anticipate the general lines of action that will be followed to solve the problem

Structure

Manipulate the information provided to generate a given structure. This includes selecting the elements required to solve the problem, differentiating between tasks, people and things, grouping the elements into categories, and ordering the elements based on relevant criteria

Describe

Describe the structural and functional properties of the proposed organization or the process followed to reach it

Justify

Verbalize the reasons behind the decisions and actions taken. Typical construction: “(I am doing / saying) A because B, C, D”, where A is the verbal or nonverbal response and B, C and D are the reasons behind it

Evaluate

Check the appropriateness of the solution and the process followed to achieve it

Correct

Change any aspect of the solution

Difficulties

Verbalizations indicating difficulties in understanding or performing the task

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sánchez-Manzanares, M., Rico, R. & Gil, F. Designing Organizations: Does Expertise Matter?. J Bus Psychol 23, 87–101 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9076-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-9076-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation