Not With A Bang, But A Whimper
Author | Kenneth J. Meier,John Bohte |
Date | 01 March 2003 |
Published date | 01 March 2003 |
DOI | 10.1177/0095399702250351 |
Subject Matter | Articles |
10.1177/0095399702250351ARTICLEADMINISTRATION & SOCIETY / March 2003Meier, Bohte / EXPLAINING ORGANIZATIONAL FAILURES
NOT WITH A BANG, BUT A WHIMPER
Explaining Organizational Failures
KENNETH J. MEIER
Texas A&M University
JOHN BOHTE
Oakland University
This article uses an ideal stereotypical approach to examine the process of the organiza-
tional failures. Private sector stereotypesof government organizations are used to generate
hypotheses about when public organizations fail. The hypotheses are tested using 1,000
school districts in Texas.In direct contrast to the hypotheses, the extentof bureaucracy is not
related to failures. The only consistent resultsare that failures are linked to multiple goals
and more difficult tasks.
Keywords: organizational failure; path dependence; education policy; schools
Organizations sacrifice (Simon, 1947). When faced with problems, they
try alternatives marginally differentfrom current activities and determine
whether the situation improves. Organizationsact, therefore, in a series of
trial and error moves. This decision-making process virtually guarantees
that all large-scale formal organizationsmake mistakes. Although the pro-
cess of failure is crucial to a satisfying decision process, the public admin-
istration literature pays little attention to organizational failures and then
usually only with case study data (Binkin, 1976; Poveda, 1990). Because
we believe that studying a system’s failures provides more crucial infor-
mation about how the system operates and its capabilities than studying a
104
AUTHORS’ NOTE: An earlier version of this article was presented at the 58th National
Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April 27-30, 2000, ChicagoIllinois.
Wewould like to thank Lee Ann Krause, Sandy Gordon, and Brandice Canes-Wronefor their
helpful insights. All data and documentation to replicatethis analysis are available from the
National Public Management Research Archive (http://bush.tamu.edu/pubman/).
ADMINISTRATION & SOCIETY, Vol. 35 No. 1, March 2003 104-121
DOI: 10.1177/0095399702250351
© 2003 Sage Publications
system’s successes, this article takes an explicit multiorganizationallook
at the phenomenon of organizational failures. Our concern is not macro-
failures (the collapse and demise of the organization) simply because
organizations, like comatose patients, can be kept on life support indefi-
nitely (e.g., the Selective Service System). Rather our concern is micro-
failures, the failure to produce the outputs requested by political sover-
eigns. Unlike macro-failures, which are relatively rare, micro-failures
should occur with sufficient frequency to allow systematic study.
The study proceeds in several steps. First, we introduce a way to view
public organization failures by using logic from the mythology of the pri-
vate sector. Second, this approach generates a series of testable hypothe-
ses about the micro-failures of organizations. Third, a data set on public
schools is introduced that can be used to test these hypotheses, and spe-
cific measures will be introduced. Fourth, the hypotheses are examined
using a pooled time series analysis of more than 1,000 public organiza-
tions over a 4-year time period. Finally, the implications of this research
for the study of organizations are discussed.
ORGANIZATIONS:
AN IDEAL STEREOTYPICAL APPROACH
Max Weber (1946) introduced the “ideal typical” approach to bureau-
cracy.He described an ideal rational organization and proposed that anal-
ysis proceed by comparing reality to that standard. Our approach is simi-
lar, but we use the stereotypes applied to public and privateorganizations.
Wemake no claims that these ideal stereotypes describe real world organi-
zations, only that they provide a contrasting rationale that will generate
some interesting hypotheses. The key stereotype is of the rational, profit-
maximizing private organizationsituated in a system of pure competition.
A ruthless market thus provides a process for weeding out failing organi-
zations and rewarding those that make correct decisions. In contrast, the
ideal stereotypical government organization does not maximize profits
and holds a monopoly over the provision of services (Downs, 1967). The
literature on private sector organizations providesmost of the logic for an
ideal stereotypical approach to organizational failures.
When discussing the term organizational failures,management schol-
ars typically point to events that seriously affect the competitiveposition
or very existence of an organization. One set of observers(Miles & Snow,
1994) suggest that some failures result when organizations’ incorrectly
Meier, Bohte / EXPLAINING ORGANIZATIONAL FAILURES 105
To continue reading
Request your trial