Why hierarchies thrive

Hardly anyone has a good word to say about hierarchies. Academics, consultants, and management gurus regularly forecast their imminent replacement because hierarchies--even when populated by considerate and intelligent people--can be cruel and stupid. They routinely transform motivated and loyal employees into disaffected Dilberts. It's no wonder that we continue to search for more humane and productive alternatives to them. Yet the intensity with which we struggle against hierarchies only serves to highlight their durability. Hierarchy, it seems, may be intrinsic not only to the natural world but also to our own natures. In this article, organizational behavior expert Harold J. Leavitt presents neither a defense of human hierarchies nor another attack on them. Instead, he offers a reality check, a reminder that hierarchy remains the basic structure of most, if not all, large, ongoing human organizations. That's because although they are often depicted as being out of date, hierarchies have proved to be extraordinarily adaptive. Over the past 50 years, for example, they have co-opted the three major managerial movements--human relations, analytic management, and communities of practice. Hierarchies also persist because they deliver real practical and psychological value, and they fulfill our deep need for order and security. Despite the good they may do, hierarchies are inevitably authoritarian. That authoritarianism shows up in all kinds of ways and influences everything in organizations, particularly communication. In multilevel organizations, for instance, messages get distorted as they travel up and down the ladder of command. Self-protection and self-interest weigh in, and relevant information is lost as messages make stops along the route. Sensitive leaders take steps to make speaking the truth as painless as possible. But it never is in organizations, because authoritarianism is an immutable element of hierarchy.     

Implementing: Alternatives,costs, and benefits

This essay provides a conceptual framework for thinking about the problem of implementing (i.e. getting things done) as part of the larger process of managing. We shall isolate some alternative approaches to that implementing problem and briefly examine the underlying beliefs, the accompanying technologies, and the attendant costs/benefits of those alternatives. We shall then make a few suggestions about appropriate alternatives for the decade ahead.     

Improvements to Market Efficiency through the Operation of the Alberta Pork Producers' Marketing Board

This study evaluates the market performance of the Alberta Pork Producers' Marketing Boar J since it became the single selling agency for hogs in Alberta in 1969. Concepts of pricing and operational efficiency are applied, and comparisons made with Winnipeg, Toronto, and the average of seven U.S. markets. The effect of market information on operational and pricing efficiency is also assessed. Cost reductions in the hog marketing system are used to assess operational efficiency. Cost savings are documented and attributed to the Producers' Hog Indemnity Fund, the assembly yard system, the hog allocation system, the “cheque float mechanism.” and the hog settlement procedure. Pricing efficiency is evaluated using graphic. statistical and econometric methods. Results from these techniques are compared, among market areas, during various time periods representing policy changes by the board. The major conclusions from this study are that the board's selling and market information procedures have improved operational efficiency. However, a firm conclusion concerning pricing efficiency cannot be made because of mixed evidence. It is recommended that other commodity interests could benefit from becoming involved in co-operative selling through a single selling agency. Cette étude a évalu'e le succés du marché de la régie albertaine de mise en marché du pore. Depuis 1969, e'est ia seule agence de venle des produits du pore en Alberta. Les auteurs considered ?efficacité de la détermination desprix et des operations et comparenl les marchés de Winnipeg, Toronto et une moyenne de sept marchés américains. ?information disponible sur le marché a étéévaluée aussi afin de déterminer son effet sur ?efficacité operalionnelle ainsi que ?efficacité du mécanisme des prix. Les conclusions principales de cette étude sont que les procédures de vente et ?approvisionnemenl de ?information sur le marché ont amélioré?efficacité operalionnelle de la régie. Cependant, à cause ?évidence mixte, une conclusion definitive concernant ?efficacité due mécanisme des prix ne peut pas étre formulée. Les auteurs recommandent que les producteurs ?autres produits de base pourraient profiler ?une participation dans la vente co-opérative par une agence unique de vente.