Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:58:55.199Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Organizational Growth and Goal Structure: the Case of the ILO

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Norman F. Dufty
Norman F. Dufty
Affiliation:
Norman F. Dufty is Dean of the Division of Commerce and Social Sciences, Western Australian Institute of Technology, South Bentley, Australia.
Get access

Extract

This article outlines some of the propositions on organizational growth and goal structure contained in the literature on organization theory. A number of hypotheses are derived from this body of material and these are tested against the International Labor Organization experience.1

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , Summer 1972 , pp. 479 - 498
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The author acknowledges the helpful comments of Professors Charles Perrow of the State University of New York, Stony Brook, and Murray Edelman of the University of Wisconsin, and Mr. C. E. Carr of the Western Australian Institute of Technology. They bear no blame for any of this article's inadequacies.

The author was on the staff of the ILO in Geneva in 1962–63, and was concerned largely with technical assistance in the field of management development. In 1963–64, he was in charge of a UN Special Fund project in the Republic of China for which the ILO was the executing agency. Experience of this sort is likely to give both insight and bias. It is hoped that the benefits of the former outweigh the latter.

2 Gouldner, A. W., “Organizational Analyses,” in Merton, R. K., Brown, L. and Cotterell, L. S. (eds.), Sociology Today (New York: Basic Books, 1959), p. 407.Google Scholar

3 Haas, Ernst B., Beyond the Nation State (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964), p. 92.Google Scholar

4 Barnard, C., Functions of the Executive (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938)Google Scholar; Gordon, R. A., Business Leadership in the Large Corporation (Washington: Brookings, 1945);Google ScholarKatona, G., Psychological Analysis of Economic Behavior (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951);Google ScholarNewman, W. H. and Logan, J. P., Management of Expanding Enterprises (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955);Google ScholarStarbuck, W. H., “Organizational Growth and Development,” in March, J. G. (ed.), Handbook of Organizations (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964).Google Scholar

5 L., and Troclet, E., Legislation Sociale Internationale (Brussels: Les Editions de la Librairie Encyclopédique, 1952), pp. 75–96, Haas, 1964, p. 142.Google Scholar

6 International Labor Organization, Official Bulletin: 6, 1922, pp. 377–382, Haas, 1964, p. 148.

7 Phelan, E. J., Yes and Albert Thomas (London: Cresset, 1936).Google Scholar

8 Hewes, Cited in A., “The Conference at Work,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science: 166 (1933), pp. 86–94.Google Scholar

9 Hanna, Cited in H. S., “Co-operation of the United States with the I.L.O.,” in Miller, S. (ed.), What the International Labor Organization Means to America: 83 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936).Google Scholar

10 Haas, 1964, p. 151.

11 International Labor Organization, Towards Our Time Inheritance (Montreal: ILO, 1942), p. 16.Google Scholar

12 In the light of previous statements and the “economic resolution” of the 1935 Conference, it is debatable whether international economic planning should be called a “new” direction. It was, however, the first time that international economic planning had been interwoven with the other goals.

13 Haas, 1964, pp. 155–158.

14 Haas, 1964; Fried, J. H. E., “Relations Between the United Nations and the International Labor Organization,“ American Political Science Review, 41 (1947), pp. 963–977.Google Scholar

15 Fried, 1947, p. 977.

16 Kaul, N. N., India and the ILO (New Delhi: Metro Book, 1956).Google Scholar

17 Haas, 1964, pp. 163–170.

18 Ibid., pp. 234–235.

19 United States House of Representatives, hearings before the Sub-Committee on International Organizations and Movements, Committee on Foreign Affairs, 84th Congress, 2nd Session, (1956), pp. 64–65.

20 Delaney, G., “Truman's Plan and the ILO,” American Federationist, 56 (1949), p. 18.Google Scholar

21 International Labor Conference, Report of the Director-General (Geneva: ILO, 1949), p. 4.

22 International Labor Conference, Report of the Director-General (Geneva: ILO, 1953), p. 52.Google Scholar

23 International Labor Conference, Report of the Director-General (Geneva: ILO, 1966), p. 20.Google Scholar

24 International Labor Conference, Report of the Director-General (Geneva: ILO, 1965), p. 16.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., p. 45.

26 Blau, Peter, Dynamics of Bureaucracy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955);Google ScholarSills, D. L., The Volunteers (Glencoe: Free Press, 1957); Starbuck, 1956.Google Scholar

27 Pense, O. E., The YMCA and Social Needs (New York: Association Press, 1939);Google ScholarMessinger, Sheldon, “Organizational Transformation: A Case Study of a Declining Social Movement,” American Sociological Review, 20 (1955), pp. 3–10;CrossRefGoogle ScholarEtzioni, Amitai, “Two Approaches to Organizational Analysis,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 5 (1960), pp. 260–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 Gusfield, J. R., “Social Structure and Moral Reform: A Study of the Women's Christian Temperance Union,” American Journal of Sociology, 61 (1955), pp. 221–232.Google Scholar

29 International Labor Conference, 1965, pp. 10–11.Google Scholar

30 Ibid., p. 93.

31 Haire, M., “Biological Models and Empirical Histories of the Growth of Organizations,” in Haire, M. (ed.), Modern Organization Theory (New York: Wiley, 1959), pp. 272–306.Google Scholar

32 Simon, H. A., “Birth of an Organization: The Economic Co-operation Administration, Public Administration Review, 13 (1953), pp. 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33 Thompson, J. D. and McEwen, W. J., “Organizational Goals and Environments: Goal Setting as an Interaction Process,” American Sociological Review, 23 (1958), pp. 23–31; Starbuck, 1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 Simon, H. A., “On the Concept of Organizational Goal,“ Administrative Science Quarterly, 9 (1964), pp. 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35 Waldo, D., The Administrative State (New York: Ronald Press, 1948), pp. 198–205;Google Scholar Haas, 1964, pp. 89–95.

36 March, J. G. and Simon, H. A., Organizations (New York: Wiley, 1958), p. 126.Google Scholar

37 Cox, R. W., “Towards a General Theory of International Organizations,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 19 (1965), pp. 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38 Selznick, Philip, Leadership in Administration (Evanston: Row Peterson, 1957), p. 138.Google Scholar

39 The system was not only multi-polar but also multi-dimensional, the original management-labor pairing being supplemented by others such as Commnnist-non-Communist, developed-developing, and so on.

40 Cox, , 1965, p. 103.Google Scholar

41 Haas, 1964, p. 171.

42 March and Simon, 1958, pp. 151–157.

43 Dill, W. R., “The Impact of the Environment on Organizational Development,” in Mailick, S. and Ness, E. H. Van (eds.), Concepts and Issues in Administrative Behavior (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1962), p. 56.Google Scholar

44 March and Simon, 1958.

46 Haas, , 1964, p. 136.Google Scholar

46 Cox, 1965, p. 105.

47 Ibid., p. 102.

48 Haas, 1964, p. 179

49 Ibid., p. 206.