Adhocracy and Bureaucracy
Numéro
2001/14
Bureaucracy vs. Adhocracy: a case of overdramatisation?
Fabienne AUTIER Professeur Unité Pédagogique et de Recherche Hommes et Stratégies Equipe Management des Ressources Humaines E.M.LYON Juillet 2001
Communication effectuée au 17ième Colloque EGOS “The Odyssey of Organizing”, thème “European Group for Organizational Studies”, 5-7 Juillet 2001, Lyon, France
Bureaucracy vs. Adhocracy: a case of overdramatisation?
Abstract : It has been argued that bureaucratic management systems were definitely non effective if organizations were to innovate. As an alternative it has been argued that only non-bureaucratic type of management systems i.e “organic” or “adhocratic” management systems were conducive to innovation. In this article, a case study of a highly innovative firm suggests that the alternative is not as straightforward as it may seem. The study investigates a conceptual and practical asymmetry between the two ideal-types. The study’s findings identify a major blind spot of the supposedly non-bureaucratic management systems : namely, regulation. This leads us to argue that Adhocratic management systems are not a self-standing alternative to Bureaucratic management systems, but rather a variation of the latter. Such a variation tends to generate a “paradoxical management system”. Key words : Innovation, Bureaucracy, Adhocracy
Résumé : Les systèmes de management bureaucratiques sont généralement considérés comme des freins à l’innovation dans les organisations productives. On défend plus volontiers que des systèmes de management « organiques » ou « adhocratiques » permettent à l’innovation d’advenir. Cet article rapporte les résultats d’une analyse de cas longitudinale d’une firme hautement innovante qui suggère que l’alternative conceptuelle (bureaucratie vs. adhocratie) n’est pas si claire, ni pertinente. Le système de management analysé, de type adhocratique, souffre de nombreuses limites, et notamment d’un déficit majeur de
2001/14
Bureaucracy vs. Adhocracy: a case of overdramatisation?
Fabienne AUTIER Professeur Unité Pédagogique et de Recherche Hommes et Stratégies Equipe Management des Ressources Humaines E.M.LYON Juillet 2001
Communication effectuée au 17ième Colloque EGOS “The Odyssey of Organizing”, thème “European Group for Organizational Studies”, 5-7 Juillet 2001, Lyon, France
Bureaucracy vs. Adhocracy: a case of overdramatisation?
Abstract : It has been argued that bureaucratic management systems were definitely non effective if organizations were to innovate. As an alternative it has been argued that only non-bureaucratic type of management systems i.e “organic” or “adhocratic” management systems were conducive to innovation. In this article, a case study of a highly innovative firm suggests that the alternative is not as straightforward as it may seem. The study investigates a conceptual and practical asymmetry between the two ideal-types. The study’s findings identify a major blind spot of the supposedly non-bureaucratic management systems : namely, regulation. This leads us to argue that Adhocratic management systems are not a self-standing alternative to Bureaucratic management systems, but rather a variation of the latter. Such a variation tends to generate a “paradoxical management system”. Key words : Innovation, Bureaucracy, Adhocracy
Résumé : Les systèmes de management bureaucratiques sont généralement considérés comme des freins à l’innovation dans les organisations productives. On défend plus volontiers que des systèmes de management « organiques » ou « adhocratiques » permettent à l’innovation d’advenir. Cet article rapporte les résultats d’une analyse de cas longitudinale d’une firme hautement innovante qui suggère que l’alternative conceptuelle (bureaucratie vs. adhocratie) n’est pas si claire, ni pertinente. Le système de management analysé, de type adhocratique, souffre de nombreuses limites, et notamment d’un déficit majeur de