Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Die Rolle der Hierarchie in weniger hierarchischen Organisationen

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Zukunftsfähigkeit durch Innovation, Digitalisierung und Technologien

Part of the book series: Organisationskompetenz Zukunftsfähigkeit ((OZ))

Zusammenfassung

Durch den Trend zu neuen und innovativen Organisationsformen entstehen nicht-hierarchische selbststeuernde Organisationen. Sie zielen darauf ab, anpassungsfähiger und flexibler zu sein, um auf schnell verändernde Marktbedingungen reagieren zu können. Ihre Kernprinzipien wie Selbstorganisation und nicht-hierarchische Strukturen stehen dabei im Widerspruch zu der Behauptung, dass alle Organisationen ausnahmslos hierarchisch sind. Die vorliegende Fallstudie untersucht das Paradoxon fortbestehender Hierarchien in nicht-hierarchischen Organisationen, in dem eine soziokratische Organisation analysiert wird. Die Ergebnisse der qualitativen Interviews befassen sich sowohl mit informellen als auch mit formalen Hierarchien, die in selbststeuernden Organisationen existieren. Darüber hinaus diskutiert die Studie die Einflüsse soziokratischer Prinzipien, der Organisationskultur und der Persönlichkeit auf die Entstehung informeller Hierarchien und liefert praktische Implikationen für selbststeuernde Organisationen.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Accard P (2015) Complex hierarchy: the strategic advantages of a trade-off between hierarchical supervision and self-organizing. Eur Manag J 33:89–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler PS (2001) Market, hierarchy, and trust: the knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organ Sci 12:215–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja MK, Carley KM (1999) Network structure in virtual organizations. Organ Sci 10:741–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen JA (2002) Organizational design: two lessons to learn before reorganizing. Int J Org Theory Behav 5:343–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson C, Brown CE (2010) The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Res Organ Behav 30:55–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker JR (1993) Tightening the iron cage: concertive control in self-managing teams. Adm Sci Q 38:408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkow JH, Akiwowo AA, Barua TK, Chance MRA, Chapple ED et al (1975) Prestige and culture: a biosocial interpretation [and comments and replies]. Curr Anthropol 16:553–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister RF, Leary MR (1995) The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull 117:497–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blau PM, Scott WR (2003) Formal organizations: a comparative approach. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockhaus (o. J.) Hierarchie (Sozialwissenschaften). http://brockhaus.de/ecs/enzy/article/hierarchie-sozialwissenschaften. Zugegriffen: 5. Apr. 2019

  • Bryman A, Bell E (2015) Business research methods, 4. Aufl. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck JA, Endenburg G (2010) The creative forces of self-organization. Sociocratic center. http://www.habitatreimagined.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Creative-Forces-of-Self-Organization1-4.pdf. Zugegriffen: 4. Juli 2019

  • Bunge M (1998) Social science under debate: a philosophical perspective. University of Toronto Press, Toronto

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burns TM, Stalker GM (1961) The management of innovation. Tavistock Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin J, Strauss A (1990) Grounded theory research: procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Z Soziol 19:418–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courpasson D (2000) Managerial strategies of domination: power in soft bureaucracies. Organ Stud 21:141–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courpasson D, Clegg S (2006) Dissolving the iron cages? Tocqueville, Michels, bureaucracy and the perpetuation of elite power. Organization 13:319–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csar M (2017) Holacracy: Heilsbringer für die Organisation der Zukunft oder gut verkauftes Rollenspiel? Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Z Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) 48:155–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (2014) A naturalist’s voyage round the world: the voyage of the beagle. Skyhorse Publishing, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • DeDreu CKW, West MA (2001) Minority dissent and team innovation: the importance of participation in decision making. J Appl Psychol 86:1191–1201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Leede J, Nijhof AHJ, Fisscher OAM (1999) The myth of self-managing teams: a reflection on the allocation of responsibilities between individuals, teams and the organisation. J Bus Ethics 21:203–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach T, Sillince JAA (2011) Formal and informal hierarchy in different types of organization. Organ Stud 32:1515–1537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs A (1967) Inside bureaucracy. Rand corporation research study, 1. Aufl. Little Brown, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eckstein J (2016) Sociocracy: An organization model for large-scale agile development. In: Proceedings of the scientific workshop proceedings of XP2016. S 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev 14:532–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellinger EW, Gregory RW (2018) Owning without ownership: how self-managing organizations reshape internal corporate governance. Acad Manag Proc 2018:16363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endenburg G (1988) Sociocracy: the organization of decision-making: „no-objection“ as the principle of sociocracy. Stichting Sociocratisch Centrum, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick U (2010) Triangulation. In: Mey G, Mruck K (Hrsg) Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie, 1. Aufl. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (GWV), Wiesbaden, S 278–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner N (1976) The non-hierarchical organization of the future: theory vs reality. Public Adm Rev 36:591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia DA, Corley KG, Hamilton AL (2013) Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research. Organ Res Methods 16:15–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J 17:109–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hales C (2002) ‚Bureaucracy-lite‘ and continuities in managerial work. Br J Manag 13:51–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halevy N (2008) Team negotiation: social, epistemic, economic, and psychological consequences of subgroup conflict. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 34:1687–1702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halevy N, Chou EY, Galinsky AD (2011) A functional model of hierarchy. Organ Psychol Rev 1:32–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedlund G (1986) The hypermodern MNC – a heterarchy? Human Resource Manage 25:9–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedlund G (1994) A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strateg Manag J 15:73–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hejl PM (1992) Politik, Pluralismus und gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung. In: Bußhoff H (Hrsg) Politische Steuerung. Steuerbarkeit und Steuerungsfähigkeit; Beiträge zur Grundlagendiskussion, 1. Aufl. Nomos, Baden-Baden, S 107–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede G (1980) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Sage, Beverly Hills

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaques E (1990) In praise of hierarchy. Harvard Bus Rev 68:127–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Kärreman D, Alvesson M (2004) Cages in Tandem: management control, social identity, and identification in a knowledge-intensive firm. Organization 11:149–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keltner D, Capps L, Kring AM, Young RC, Heerey EA (2001) Just teasing: a conceptual analysis and empirical review. Psychol Bull 127:229–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuckartz U, Dresing T, Rädiker S, Stefer C (2008) Qualitative Evaluation: Der Einstieg in die Praxis, 2. Aufl. VS Verlag/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar SV, Mukherjee S (2018) Holacracy – the future of organizing? The case of Zappos. Human Resource Manage Int Digest 26:12–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laloux F (2015a) A future more powerful than hierarchy. Workforce Solution Rev 6:12–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Laloux F (2015b) Reinventing organizations: Ein Leitfaden zur Gestaltung sinnstiftender Formen der Zusammenarbeit. Vahlen, München

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Langfred CW (2007) The downside of self-management: a longitudinal study of the effects of conflict on trust, autonomy, and task interdependence in self-managing teams. Acad Manag J 50:885–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley A (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. Acad Manag Rev 24:691–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt HJ (2004) Top down: why hierarchies are here to stay and how to manage them more effectively. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee MY, Edmondson AC (2017) Self-managing organizations: exploring the limits of less-hierarchical organizing. Res Organ Behav 37:35–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumby J (2019) Distributed leadership and bureaucracy. Educ Manage Adm Leadersh 47:5–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magee JC, Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: the self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Acad Manag Ann 2:351–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manz CC, Sims HP (1987) Leading workers to lead themselves: the external leadership of self- managing work teams. Adm Sci Q 32:106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenna S, Garcia-Lorenzo L, Bridgman T (2010) Managing, managerial control and managerial identity in the post-bureaucratic world. J Manage Dev 29:128–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mey G, Mruck K (2010) Interviews. In: Mey G, Mruck K (Hrsg) Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie, 1. Aufl. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden, S. 423–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg H (1980) Structure in 5’s: a synthesis of the research on organization design. Manage Sci 26:322–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishin S (2007) Optimal organizational hierarchies in firms. J Bus Econ Manag 8:79–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miura S (2013) Hierarchy. Encyclopædia britannica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/hierarchy-social-science. Zugegriffen: 5. Apr. 2019

  • Murshed STH, Uddin S, Hossain L (2015) Transitivity, hierarchy and reciprocity of organizational communication network during crisis. Int J Organ Anal 23:2–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oedzes JJ, van der Vegt GS, Rink FA, Walter F (2019) On the origins of informal hierarchy: the interactive role of formal leadership and task complexity. J Organ Behav 40:311–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1998) A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action: presidential address, american political science association, 1997. Am Polit Sci Rev 92:1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1963) The open society and its enemies, 4. Aufl. Princeton University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Purser RE, Cabana S (1999) The role of management in a self-managing organization. National Productivity Review 18:41–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reihlen M, Mone M (2012) Professional service firms, knowledge-based competition, and the heterarchical organization form. In: Reihlen M, Werr A (Hrsg) Handbook of research on entrepreneurship in professional services. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, S 107–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Reihlen M (1999) Moderne, postmoderne und heterarchische Organisation. In: Schreyögg G (Hrsg) Organisation und Postmoderne. Gabler, Wiesbaden, S 265–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Reihlen M (2004) Hierarchie (hierarchy). In: Schreyögg G, von Werder A (Hrsg) Handwörterbuch Unternehmensführung und Organisation (HWO), 4. Aufl. Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart, S 407–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson B (2016) Holacracy, 1. Aufl. Vahlen, München

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Romme AGL (1995) The sociocratic model of organizing. Strateg Chang 4:209–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders M, Lewis P, Thornhill A (2016) Research methods for business students, 7. Aufl. Pearson, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxena A, Jagota R (2016) Could sociocracy be the way to MSME governance? Indian J Corp Governance 9:173–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf FW (1993a) Coordination in hierarchies and networks. In: Scharpf FW (Hrsg) Games in hierarchies and networks: analytical and empirical approaches to the study of governance institutions. Campus, Frankfurt a. M., S 125–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf FW (1993b) Positive und negative Koordination in Verhandlungssystemen. MPIFG discussion paper 93/1. Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung, Köln

    Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow N (2007) Persuasion with case studies. Acad Manag J 50:20–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1996) The sciences of the artificial, 3. Aufl. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Snape D, Spencer L (2003) The foundations of qualitative research. In: Ritchie J, Lewis J (Hrsg) Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers. Sage, London, S 2–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinke I (1999) Kriterien qualitativer Forschung: Ansätze zur Bewertung qualitativ-empirischer Sozialforschung. Juventa, Weinheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart GL, Courtright SH, Barrick MR (2012) Peer-based control in self-managing teams: linking rational and normative influence with individual and group performance. J Appl Psychol 97:435–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss AL, Corbin JM (1996) Grounded theory: Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Psychologie-Verlag-Union, Beltz

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine MA, Edmondson AC (2015) Team scaffolds: how mesolevel structures enable role-based coordination in temporary groups. Organ Sci 26:405–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Kamp P (2014). Holacracy – a radical approach to organizational design. In: Dekkers H, Leeuwis W, Plantevin I (Hrsg) Elements of the software development process: influences on project success and failure. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, S 13–26

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vugt M, Hogan R, Kaiser RB (2008) Leadership, followership, and evolution: Some lessons from the past. Am Psychol 63:182–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volberda HW (1996) Toward the flexible form: how to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organ Sci 7:359–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber M (1946) From max weber: essays in sociology. (Gerth, H. Heinrich, Hrsg.). Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber M (1980) Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Mohr (Siebeck), Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Willke H (1995) Systemtheorie III: Steuerungstheorie: Grundzüge einer Theorie der Steuerung komplexer Sozialsysteme. Fischer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Willke H (1989) Systemtheorie entwickelter Gesellschaften: Dynamik und Riskanz moderner gesellschaftlicher Selbstorganisation. Juventa, Weinheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Waldman DA, Han Y-L, Li X-B (2015) Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: antecedents and consequences. Acad Manag J 58:538–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wiesbaden, Deutschland

    Anna Abrell

Authors
  1. Anna Abrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warburg, Germany

    Markus Bodemann

  2. West Sacramento, USA

    Wiebke Fellner

  3. Hamburg, Germany

    Vanessa Just

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Abrell, A. (2021). Die Rolle der Hierarchie in weniger hierarchischen Organisationen. In: Bodemann, M., Fellner, W., Just, V. (eds) Zukunftsfähigkeit durch Innovation, Digitalisierung und Technologien. Organisationskompetenz Zukunftsfähigkeit. Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62148-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62148-6_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-62147-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-62148-6

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation