Talking About Organizations Podcast

Following on a theme from the previous episode, we explore an important reading that bridges organization theory with economics. This was the explicit aim of Oliver E. Williamson’s famous article, “The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach,” published in the American Journal of Sociology in 1981. The article begins with a statement that the assumption of firms operating on a profit motive has not helped organization theorists understand and explain the behaviors of firms, and that economists were also finding themselves similarly limited. He thus set out on a different path and argued that transactions, not the products or services the firm provides, is a better unit of analysis.

In the discussion, we wrestle with Williamson’s central arguments and proposals, such as the construct of the efficient organizational boundary, human asset specificity and the difference types of governance structures related to it, and how markets and hierarchies represent different choices for organizing. We also explored a related article presenting early thoughts about the growing impact of rapid advances in information technology on firm and market structures. Written in 1987, Tom Malone et al.’s “Electronic Markets and Electronic Hierarchies” presages the modern online economic environment and its many virtual interactions between seller and buyers. This fascinating extension of Williamson’s ideas made a number of predictions. How many came true 30 years later?

Following on a theme from the previous episode, we explore an important reading that bridges organization theory with economics. This was the explicit aim of Oliver E. Williamson’s famous article, “The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach,” published in the American Journal of Sociology in 1981. The article begins with a statement that the assumption of firms operating on a profit motive has not helped organization theorists understand and explain the behaviors of firms, and that economists were also finding themselves similarly limited. He thus set out on a different path and argued that transactions, not the products or services the firm provides, is a better unit of analysis.

In the discussion, we wrestle with Williamson’s central arguments and proposals, such as the construct of the efficient organizational boundary, human asset specificity and the difference types of governance structures related to it, and how markets and hierarchies represent different choices for organizing. We also explored a related article presenting early thoughts about the growing impact of rapid advances in information technology on firm and market structures. Written in 1987, Tom Malone et al.’s “Electronic Markets and Electronic Hierarchies” presages the modern online economic environment and its many virtual interactions between seller and buyers. This fascinating extension of Williamson’s ideas made a number of predictions. How many came true 30 years later?

De-centralization as a guideline or strategy is thought to promote innovation and greater participation. Organizations that de-centralize as a matter of course may view centralized hierarchy as old-fashioned, complacent, even ossified. So, what about the virtues of centralization? One of the main arguments for greater centralization in organizations is that it brings greater efficiency.

In this final part, we step out of the debate and discuss centralization vs. decentralization as ourselves. So what do we think? The results may surprise you!

The debate continues with question N2: "Why do organizations oscillate between centralization and decentralization, and is there a golden mean?". Join in as we shift the context to more contemporary matters. What are the benefits and risks of centralizing or de-centralizing organizations in modern times?

How exciting! The podcasters engaging in debate over whether centralizing is better or should organizations de-centralize? Learn about how this tension shaped the early days of the United States while Ralph and Pedro face off against Dmitrijs and Tom!

A special Thank You also goes out to Todd Bridgman and Stephen Cummings who set the tone and questions for this very first TAOP debate!

Episode 42 concludes as the podcasters discuss unlearning, present their takeaways and budding research questions based on Levitt & March's review of "Organizational Learning," our fifth episode in the Carnegie-Mellon series. What would it take for organizations to learn 'better'? How might we find out? Where does collective intelligence come in?

Also see: Episode 4 on Organizational Routines, Episode 19 on Organizational Learning, Episode 29 on Business School Design, Episode 39 on Organizational Choice, and our Series Introduction.

Episode 42 continues as we debate the gaps and lingering questions in Levitt & March's review of "Organizational Learning," our fifth episode in the Carnegie-Mellon series. What did we think about the author's views on organizational memory? What about the levels of analysis used in the text? Find out our take on these and other questions.

Please join us for the fifth episode in our Carnegie-Mellon School series as we discuss Barbara Levitt and James G. March’s brilliant literature review of “Organizational Learning,” published in the Annual Review of Sociology in 1988. This work surveyed the literature across various streams in organizational learning up through the 1980s. Topics include learning from experience, organizational memory, ecologies of learning, and organizational intelligence. Of particular interest is how organizational learning was defined as not an outcome but a process of translating the cumulative experiences of individuals and codifying them as routines within the organization. But an important question remains three decades later – do organizations really learn? Tune in as we wrestle with this question, and with many others!

Near the end of Episode 41, we discussed the themes of member commitment to the organization and an organization’s commitment to its individual members. This arose in the context of our continuing discussions of the gig economy and its impact on our understandings of organization. The ‘gig economy’ was the subject of several previous episodes (such as Episode 18 on algorithmic management and Episode 36 on human capital) and was the primary focus of our first symposium, presented in three parts as Episode 40 including a keynote address and panels on defining and researching the gig economy and related phenomena. Without revisiting those discussions, suffice to say that our dialogue raised lots of questions and concerns about the gig economy.