Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Organization Design pp 43–65Cite as

Examining the Relationship Between Trust and Control in Organizational Design

(How) Can Divergent Requirements be Reconciled?

  • Chapter

Part of the Information and Organization Design Series book series (INOD,volume 6)

Abstract

Recently, organization design has been confronted with divergent demands. Whereas many organizational forms recommended to enhance organizational performance build on trust, control-oriented forms are suggested to assure compliance with an increasing number of regulatory norms. Companies face the challenge to meet both requirements concurrently. Against this background, this chapter examines whether the contrasting demands do in fact involve trade-offs and if so, whether and how they could be reconciled. Reconciling different demands may benefit from considering the following steps: Distinguish functional demands from concrete structural forms; analyze behavior which is critical for achieving the functional requirements; analyze contingencies of critical behavior and arrive at an informed behavioral assumption; design the organizational form by deliberating alternative structure building and structure flanking measures which are effective for facilitating critical behavior. If different demands have to be met simultaneously, the design elements must be thoroughly balanced.

Key words

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (Canada)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adler, P.S., 2001, Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism, Organization Science, 12: 215–234.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Banaga, A., Ray, G., and, Tomkins, C., 1995, A conceptual framework for corporate governance and effective management. Corporate Governance — An International Review, 3: 128–137.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Buderath, H.M., 2004, Auswirkungen des Sarbanes-Oxley-Acts auf die Interne Revision, Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung und Praxis, 56: 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, R.M., and Obel, B., 1998, Strategic Organizational Diagnosis and Design, 2nd ed., Kluwer, Boston.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., and McGrath, R.G., 2001, Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an information-intensive economy, Academy of Management Journal, 44: 1135–1148.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., and Rodrigues, S.B., 2003, Corporate governance and new organizational forms: Issues of double and multiple agency, Journal of Management and Governance, 7: 337–360.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Conger, J.A., and Kanungo, R.N., 1988, The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice, Academy of Management Review, 13: 471–482.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R.L., 2000, Management, 5th ed., Dryden, Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D.R., Metzger, M.B., and Hill, J.W., 1994, The “new” U.S. sentencing commission guidelines: A wake-up call for corporate America, Academy of Management Executive, 8(1): 7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, T.K., and Teng, B.S., 1998, Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances, Academy of Management Review, 23: 491–512.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D., and Donaldson, L., 1997, Toward a stewardship theory of management, Academy of Management Review, 22: 20–47.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E.L., 1975, Intrinsic Motivation, Plenum, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L., 1996, The normal science of structural contingency theory, in: Handbook of Organization Studies, S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy, and W. R. Nord, Sage, London, pp. 57–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L., and Davis, J.H., 1991, Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns, Australian Journal of Management, 16: 49–64.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K.M., 1985., Control: Organizational and economic approaches, Management Science, 31: 134–149.

    CrossRef  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989, Agency theory: An assessment and review, Academy of Management Review, 14: 57–74.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Enzle, M.E., and Anderson, S.C., 1993, Surveillant intentions and intrinsic motivation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64: 257–266.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, R., 2000, Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea, Academy of Management Executive, 14(3): 67–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J.R., 1974, Organization design: An information processing view, Interfaces, 4(3):28–36.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J.R., 1977, Organization Design, Reading, Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J.R. 1994, Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations, 2nd ed., Reading, Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebert, D., 2000, Zwischen Freiheit und Reglementierung. Widersprüchlichkeiten als Motor inkrementalen und transformationalen Wandels in Organisationen — eine Kritik des punctuated equilibrium-Modells, in: Organisatorischer Wandel und Transformation, G. Schreyögg, and P. Conrad, 10, Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp. 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebert, D., 2004, Dilemma-Management, in: Handwörterbuch Unternehmensführung und Organisation, G. Schreyögg, and A. v. Werder, 4th ed., Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart, pp. 195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gemünden, H.G., and Salomo, S., 2004, Innovationsmanagement, in: Handwörterbuch Unternehmensführung und Organisation, G. Schreyögg, and A. v. Werder, 4th ed., Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart, pp. 505–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., 2005, Bad management theories are destroying good management practices, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4: 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., and Moran, P., 1996, Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory, Academy of Management Review, 21: 13–47.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C.B., and Birkinshaw, J., 2004, The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity, Academy of Management Journal, 47: 209–226.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Grandori, A., 2004, Refraining corporate governance: Behavioral assumptions, governance mechanisms, and institutional dynamics, in: Corporate Governance and Firm Organization: Microfoundations and Structural Forms, A. Grandori, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1–27.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gresov, C., and Drazin, R., 1997, Equifinality: Functional equivalence in organization design, Academy of Management Review, 22: 403–428.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Grundei, J., 1999, Effizienzbewertung von Organisationsstrukturen (Efficiency evaluation of organizational structures), Gabler, Wiesbaden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hütten, C., and Stromann, H., 2003, Umsetzung des Sarbanes-Oxley Act in die Unternehmenspraxis, Betriebs-Berater, 58: 2223–2227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inkpen, A.C., and Currall, S.C., 2004, The coevolution of trust, control, and learning in joint ventures, Organization Science, 15: 586–599.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffee, D., 2001, Organization Theory: Tension and change, McGraw-Hill, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J.J.P., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., and Volberda, H.W., 2005, Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: The impact of environmental and organizational antecedents, Schmalenbach Business Review, 57: 351–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M.C., and Meckling, W.H., 1976, Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure, Journal of Financial Economics, 3: 305–360.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, S., 1975, On the folly of rewarding A while hoping for B, Academy of Management Journal, 18: 769–783.

    CrossRef  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lampel, J., 2004, The benefit of doubt: Shadow norms and governance in trust-based organizations, in: Corporate governance and firm organization: Microfoundations and Structural Forms, A. Grandori, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 232–245.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Langfred, C., 2004, Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams, Academy of Management Journal, 47: 385–399.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E.E. III., 1993, Creating the high-involvement organization, in: Organizing for the Future: The New Logic for Managing Complex Systems, J. Galbraith, and E.E. Lawler, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 172–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A.Y., and Volberda, H.W., 1999, Prolegomena on coevolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms, Organization Science, 10: 519–534.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtman, CM., and Hunt, R.G., 1971, Personality and organization theory: A review of some conceptual literature, Psychological Bulletin, 76: 271–294.

    CrossRef  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • March, J.G., 1991, Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning, Organization Science, 2: 71–87.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., and Schoorman F.D., 1995, An integrative model of organizational trust, Academy of Management Review, 20: 709–734.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, D.J., 1995, Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations, Academy of Management Journal, 38: 24–59.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, B., Perrone, V., and Zaheer, A., 2003, Trust as an organizing principle, Organization Science, 14: 91–103.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, D., 1960, The Human Side of Enterprise, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L., and Chervany, N.L., 1998, Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships, Academy of Management Review, 23: 473–490.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, K.A., 1985, Control in Business Organizations, Pitman, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., and Friesen, P.H., 1984, Organizations — A Quantum View, Prentice-Hall, Englewodd Cliffs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, P.K., and Ungson, G.R., 2003, Reassessing the limits of structural empowerment: Organizational constitution and trust as controls, Academy of Management Review, 28: 143–153.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, E.W., and Milliken, F.J., 2000, Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world, Academy of Management Review, 25: 706–725.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nadler, D., and Tushman, M.L., 1997, Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture, Oxford University Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterloh, M., and Frey, B.S., 2004, Corporate governance for crooks? The case for corporate virtue, in: Governance and Firm Organization: Microfoundations and Structural Forms Corporate, A. Grandori, University Press, Oxford, pp. 191–211.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W.G., 1979, A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms, Management Science, 25: 833–848.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L.S., 1994, Managing for organizational integrity, Harvard Business Review, 72(2): 106–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., 1994, Competitive Advantage Through People, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinchot, G. III., 1985, Intrapreneuring, Harper and Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M.S., and Van de Ven, A.H., 1989, Using paradox to build management and organization theories, Academy of Management Review, 14: 562–578.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Poppo, L., and Zenger, T., 2002, Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements?, Strategic Management Journal, 23: 707–725.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Randolph, W.A., and Sashkin, M., 2002, Can organizational empowerment work in multinational settings?, Academy of Management Executive, 16(1): 102–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., and Camerer, C., 1998, Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust, Academy of Management Review, 23: 393–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H., 1985, Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science, American Political Science Review, 79: 293–304.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, T., 2002, Behavioral integrity: The perceived alignment between managers’ words and deeds as a research focus, Organization Science, 13: 18–35.

    CrossRef  ADS  Google Scholar 

  • Sitkin, S.B., 1995, On the positive effect of legalization on trust, Research on Negotiation in Organizations 5: 185–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spreitzer, G.M., 1996, Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment, Academy of Management Journal, 39: 483–504.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Strickland, L.H., 1958, Surveillance and trust, Journal of Personality, 26: 200–215.

    CrossRef  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sundaramurthy, C., and Lewis, M., 2003, Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance, Academy of Management Review, 28: 397–415.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M.L., and Nadler, D.A., 1978, Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design, Academy of Management Review, 3: 613–624.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M.L., and Romanelli, E., 1985, Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation, in: Research in Organizational Behavior, L.L. Cummings, and B.M. Staw, 7, JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 171–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vardi, Y., and Wiener, Y., 1996, Misbehavior in organizations: A motivational framework, Organization Science, 7: 151–165.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Volberda, H.W., 1996, Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments, Organization Science, 7: 359–374.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • v. Werder, A., and Grundei, J. 2001. Organization design: An action-theoretic approach. Paper presented at the Informs International Conference 2001, Maui, HI.

    Google Scholar 

  • v. Werder, A., and Grundei, J. 2004. Konzeptionelle Grundlagen der Center-Organisation (Conceptual foundations of organizing corporate centers). In: A. v. Werder and H. Stoeber (Eds.): Center-Organisation: Gestaltungskonzepte, Strukturentwicklung und Anwendungsbeispiele (Organization of corporate centers: Concepts for design, corporate development and examples of application). Schaeffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart: 11–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • v. Werder, A., and Grundei, J. 2006. Konzeptionelle Grundlagen des Organisations-Controllings (Conceptual foundations of controlling organizational design). In: A. v. Werder, H. Stoeber, and J. Grundei (Eds.): Organisations-Controlling: Konzepte und Praxisbeispiele (Controlling organizational design: Concepts and practical experiences). Gabler, Wiesbaden (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O.E., 1985, The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting, Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O.E., 1993, Opportunism and its critics, Managerial and Decision Economics, 14:97–107.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Technology University of Berlin, Wilmersdorfer Str. 148, D-10585, Berlin, Germany

    Jens Grundei

Authors
  1. Jens Grundei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Duke University, NC, USA

    Richard M. Burton

  2. University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

    Dorthe Døjbak Håkonsson  & Bo Eriksen  & 

  3. Pennsylvania State University, USA

    Charles C. Snow

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Grundei, J. (2006). Examining the Relationship Between Trust and Control in Organizational Design. In: Burton, R.M., Håkonsson, D.D., Eriksen, B., Snow, C.C. (eds) Organization Design. Information and Organization Design Series, vol 6. Springer, Boston, MA . https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-34173-0_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

search

Navigation