Public Organization Review

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 201–218 | Cite as

Organizational Form and Strategic Alignment in a Local Authority: A Preliminary Exploration using Fuzzy Clustering

  • Rhys AndrewsEmail author
  • Malcolm J. Beynon


Configurational theories assume that organizational form has important implications for the degree of alignment between top and middle management on strategic priorities. Taken in combination, the structure, process and environment of an organization are thought to have a deep pervasive influence on top management’s attempts to achieve the coordination and control required to attain organizational goals. The preliminary analysis described in this article employs fuzzy c-means clustering to explore the relationship between middle managers’ perceptions of organizational form and strategic alignment within a large local authority. The results illustrate that the clustering of managers’ perceptions of organizational structure, process and environment reflect three organizational archetypes: machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy and professional adhocracy. Statistically significant differences in the degree of strategic alignment between each of these organizational forms are then examined to validate the established clustering. Finally, conclusions are drawn on the theoretical and practical implications of the findings.


Organizational form Strategic alignment Local authority Cluster analysis 


  1. Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Law, J., & Walker, R. M. (2009). Strategy formulation, strategy content and performance: an empirical analysis. Public Management Review, 11(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belacel, N., Hansen, P., & Mladenovic, N. (2002). Fuzzy J-means: a new heuristic for fuzzy clustering. Pattern Recognition, 35, 2193–2200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergeron, F., Raymond, L., & Rivard, S. (2004). Ideal patterns of strategic alignment and business performance. Information & Management, 41(8), 1003–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bezdek, J. C. (1980). A convergence theorem for the fuzzy ISODATA clustering algorithms. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. PAMI, 2, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bezdek, J. C. (1981). Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  6. Blaise, P., & Kegels, G. (2004). A realistic approach to the evaluation of the quality management movement in health care systems: a comparison between European and African contexts based on Mintzberg’s organizational models. International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 19(4), 337–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2004). Strategy content and public service organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 231–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Canongia Lopes, J. N. (2004). On the classification and representation of ternary phase diagrams: The yin and yang of a T-x approach. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 6, 2314–2319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carley, K. M. (1995). Computational and mathematical organization theory: perspective and directions. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 1(1), 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DeSarbo, W. S., Di Benedetto, A. C., Song, M., & Sinha, I. (2005). Revisiting the Miles and Snow Strategic Framework: Uncovering Interrelationships between Strategic Types, Capabilities, Environmental Uncertainty, and Firm Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1), 47–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dess, G. G., & Origer, N. K. (1987). Environment, structure, and consensus in strategy formulation: a conceptual integration. Academy of Management Review, 12(2), 313–330.Google Scholar
  12. Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (1993). Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: a test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1198–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dutton, J. E., Fahey, L., & Narayanan, V. K. (1983). Toward understanding strategic issue diagnosis. Strategic Management Journal, 4(4), 307–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Downs, A. (1967). Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  15. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: an assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.Google Scholar
  16. Frayley, C., & Raftery, E. (1998). How many clusters? Which clustering method? Answers via model-based cluster analysis. The Computer Journal, 41(8), 578–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  18. Galbraith, J. R., & Nathanson, D. A. (1978). Strategy Implementation: The Role of Structure and Process. New York: West Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1992). Multivariate Data Analysis (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Hrebiniak, L. G., & Joyce, W. F. (1984). Implementing strategy. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Johansen, M. (2007). The effect of female strategic managers on organizational performance. Public Organization Review, 7(3), 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Joshi, M. P., Kathuria, R., & Port, S. J. (2003). Alignment of strategic priorities and performance: an integration of operations and strategic management perspectives. Journal of Operations Management, 21, 353–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kabanoff, B., & Brown, S. (2008). Knowledge structures of prospectors, defenders and analyzers: content, structure stability and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(2), 149–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ketchen, D. J., Jr., & Shook, C. L. (1996). The application of cluster analysis in strategic management research: an analysis and critique. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 441–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kujacic, M., & Bojovic, N. J. (2003). Organizational design of post corporation structure using fuzzy multicriteria decision making. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 9(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meier, K. J., O’Toole, L. J., Jr., Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2007). Strategic management and the performance of public organizations: testing venerable ideas against recent theories. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(3), 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1175–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miles, R., & Snow, C. (1978). Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process. London: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  29. Miller, D. (1986). Configurations of strategy and structure: towards a synthesis. Strategic Management Journal, 7(3), 233–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organisations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Nissen, M. E. (2007). Computational experimentation on new organization forms: exploring behavior and performance of Edge organizations. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 13, 203–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Olson, E. M., Slater, S. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (2005). The performance implications of fit among business strategy, marketing, organization structure, and strategic behaviour. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Papke-Shields, K. E., & Malhotra, M. K. (2001). Assessing the impact of the manufacturing executive’s role on business performance through strategic alignment. Journal of Operations Management, 19(1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Russell, R., & Russell, C. (1992). An examination of the effects of organizational norms, organizational structure, and environmental uncertainty on entrepreneurial strategy. Journal of Management, 18(1), 639–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sappington, D. E. M. (1991). Incentives in principal-agent relationships. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 45–66.Google Scholar
  36. Senge, P. (1990). The 5th Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  37. Skinner, W. (1974). The focused factory. Harvard Business Review, 3, 113–119.Google Scholar
  38. Snow, C. C., & Hrebiniak, L. G. (1980). Strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 317–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  40. Unger, J. P., Macq, J., Bredo, F., & Boelart, M. (2000). Through Mintzberg’s glasses: a fresh look at the organizational of ministries of health. Bulletin of World Health Organization, 78(8), 1005–1014.Google Scholar
  41. Venkatraman, N., & Camillus, J. C. (1984). Exploring the concept of ‘fit’ in strategic management. Academy of Management Review, 9(4), 513–525.Google Scholar
  42. Ward, P. T., & Bickford, D. J. (1996). Configurations of manufacturing strategy, business strategy, environment and structure. Journal of Management, 22(4), 597–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organizations. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  44. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zuniga-Vicente, J. A., de la Fuente-Sabate, J. M., & Suarez-Gonzalez, I. (2004). Dynamics of the strategic group membership-performance linkage in rapidly changing environments. Journal of Business Research, 57(12), 1378–1390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cardiff Business SchoolCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations