Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T01:04:43.962Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Control to cooperation: examining the role of managerial authority in portfolios of managerial actions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Chris P. Long
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Sim B. Sitkin
Affiliation:
Duke University, North Carolina
Laura B. Cardinal
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Katinka M. Bijlsma-Frankema
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
Get access

Summary

This chapter presents a new theoretical direction for control research. Managerial controls that comprise the primary focus of this research describe the various initiatives managers undertake to motivate, evaluate, and reward subordinates for performing work in ways consistent with the achievement of an organization's interests, goals, and strategies (Merchant,1985). From the earliest research on organizations, the act of controlling subordinates has been recognized as one of a manager's primary functions (Blau and Scott, 1962). Since that time, researchers have identified various mechanisms by which managers exercise control in their organizations including the development and implementation of formal policies (Barnard, 1938), rational-legal authority and rules (Weber, 1968[1918]), cultural norms and rituals (Van Maanen and Schein, 1979), or incentive systems, direct supervision, and/or work designs (Mintzberg, 1979).

While traditional control theory focuses primarily on how managers exercise their power through applications of managerial controls, I propose here that a more deliberate consideration of how managers develop and utilize their managerial authority may help scholars formulate more realistic pictures of managerial attention and action (Ocasio, 1997) and better comprehend how managers actually cultivate high levels of superior–subordinate cooperation.

Managerial authority refers to a person's right to exercise power based on the belief that his or her actions are legitimate and in alignment with accepted standards of appropriate conduct. I specifically argue that a manager's interest in preserving, protecting, and promoting his/her managerial authority constitutes a primary motivation for managerial action.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

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

Adams, J. S. 1965. Inequity of social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology:279–299. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Barley, S. and Kunda, G. 1992. Design and devotion: surges of rational and normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 363–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, C. I. 1938. The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B. and Hansen, M. 1994. Trustworthiness as a source of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 15: 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, J. B. and Hesterly, W. 1996. Organizational economics: understanding the relationship between organizations and economic analysis. In Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., and Nord, W. R. (eds.), Handbook of organization studies: 115–147. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bendersky, C. 2003. Organizational dispute resolution systems: a complementarities perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 28: 643–656.Google Scholar
Bies, R. J. and Moag, J. S. 1986. Interactional justice: communication criteria of fairness. In Lewicki, R. J., Sheppard, B. H., and Bazerman, M. H. (eds.), Research in negotiation in organizations: 43–55. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Blau, P. and Scott, W. R. 1962. Formal organizations: a comparative approach. San Francisco, CA: Chandler.Google Scholar
Bradach, J. L. and Eccles, R. G. 1989. Price, authority, and trust: from ideal types to plural forms. Annual review of sociology, 15: 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinal, L. B. 2001. Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: managing research and development using input, behavior, and output controls. Organization Science, 12: 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinal, L. B., Sitkin, S. B., and Long, C. P. 2004. Balancing and rebalancing in the creation and evolution of organizational control. Organization Science, 15: 411–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y:-R. and Church, A. H. 1993. Reward allocation preferences in groups and organizations. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 4: 25–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Das, T. K. and Teng, B. S. 1998. Between trust and control: developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Academy of Management Review, 23: 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, M. 1982. Justice in the “crunch.” In Lerner, M. J. and Lerner, S. C. (eds.), The justice motive in social behavior: 343–357. New York, NY: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Dirks, K. and Ferrin, D. 2002. Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 611–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P., and Mullen, M. R. 1998. Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23: 601–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dornbusch, S. M. and Scott, W. R. 1975. Evaluation and the exercise of authority. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Agency theory: an assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 31: 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enzle, M. E. and Anderson, S. C. 1993. Surveillant intentions and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64: 257–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folger, R. and Skarlicki, D. 1998. When tough times make tough bosses: managerial distancing as a function of layoff blame. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 100–108.Google Scholar
Ghoshal, S. and Moran, P. 1996. Bad for practice: a critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 1: 13–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. 1987. A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12: 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimes, A. J. 1978. Authority, power, influence, and social control: a theoretical synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 3: 724–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jermier, J. M. 1998. Introduction: critical theory perspectives on control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43: 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, W. C. and Mauborgne, R. A. 1997. Fair process: managing in the knowledge economy. Harvard Business Review, 38: 65–75.Google Scholar
Kirsch, L. J. 1996. The management of complex tasks in organizations: controlling the systems development process. Organization Science, 7: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J. 1977. The justice motive: some hypotheses as to its origins and forms. Journal of Personality, 45: 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leventhal, G. S., Karuza, J., and Fry, W. R. 1980. Beyond fairness: a theory of allocation preferences. In Mikula, G. (ed.), Justice and social interaction:167–218. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Lewicki, R. J. and Bunker, B. B. 1996. Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. (eds.), Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research:114–139. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, A. Y., Long, C. P., and Carroll, T. N. 1999. The co-evolution of new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10: 535–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, E. A. and Tyler, T. R. 1988. The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, C. L., Bendersky, C. B., and Morrill, C. 2010. Fairness monitoring: contextualizing fairness judgments in organizations.
Long, C. P. and Sitkin, S. B. 2006. Trust in the balance: how managers integrate trust-building and task control. In Bachmann, R. and Zaheer, A. (eds.), Handbook of trust research. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Long, C. P., Burton, R. M., and Cardinal, L. B. 2002. Three controls are better than one: a computational model of complex control systems. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 8: 197–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., and Schoorman, D. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20: 709–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meindl, J. R. 1989. Managing to be fair: an exploration of values, motives, and leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34: 252–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merchant, K. A. 1985. Control in business organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. 1979. The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Noorderhaven, N. G. 1992. The problem of contract enforcement in economic organization theory. Organization Studies, 13: 292–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ocasio, W. 1997. Toward an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 187–206.3.3.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouchi, W. G. 1979. A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25: 833–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouchi, W. G. 1980. Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrow, C. 1986. Organizations: a critical essay. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R., and Camerer, C. 1998. Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23: 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scandura, T. A., Graen, G. B., and Novak, M. A. 1986. When managers decide not to decide autocratically: an investigation of leader-member exchange and decision influence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 579–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schriesheim, C. A., Neider, L. L., and Scandura, T. A. 1998. A within- and between-groups analysis of leader-member exchange as a correlate of delegation and as a moderator of delegation relationships with performance and satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 41: 298–318.Google Scholar
Sengun, A. E. and Wasti, S. N. 2007. Trust, control and risk: a test of Das and Teng's conceptual framework for pharmaceutical buyer–supplier relationships. Group and Organization Management, 32: 430–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, D., Sheppard, B. H., and Cheraskin, L. 1992. Business in a handshake. Negotiation Journal, 8: 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sitkin, S. B. 1995. On the positive effect of legalization on trust. In Bies, R. J., Lewicki, R. J., and Sheppard, B. H. (eds.), Research on negotiations in organizations:185–217. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Sitkin, S. B. and Bies, R. J. 1994. The legalization of organizations: a multi-theoretical perspective. In Sitkin, S. B. and Bies, R. J. (eds.), The legalistic organization:19–49. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Sitkin, S. B. and George, E. 2005. Managerial trust-building through the use of legitimating formal and informal control mechanisms. International Sociology, 20: 307–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sitkin, S. B. and Roth, N. L. 1993. Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic remedies for trust/distrust. Organization Science, 4: 367–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sitkin, S. B. and Stickel, D. 1996. The road to hell: the dynamics of distrust in an era of quality. In Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. (eds.), Trust in organizations: frontiers in theory and research:196–215. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snell, S. A. 1992. Control theory in strategic human resource management: the mediating effect of administrative information. Academy of Management Journal, 35: 292–327.Google Scholar
Spreitzer, G. M. and Mishra, A. K. 1999. Giving up control without losing control: trust and its substitutes' effects on managers involving employees in decision making. Group and Organization Management, 24: 155–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchman, M. A. 1995. Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20: 571–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, T. R. and Lind, E. A. 1992. A relational model of authority in groups. In Zanna, M. P. (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology:151–191. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Maanen, J. and Schein, E. H. 1979. Toward a theory of organizational socialization. In Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. L. (eds.), Research in organizational behavior:209–264. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Weber, M. 1968. Economy and society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press (original work published in 1918).Google Scholar
Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., and Werner, J. M. 1998. Managers as initiators of trust: an exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, 23: 513–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wicks, A. C., Berman, S. L., and Jones, T. M. 1999. The structure of optimal trust: moral and strategic implications. Academy of Management Review, 24: 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, A. L. and Ouchi, W. G. 1983. Efficient cultures: exploring the relationship between culture and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28: 468–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Zucker, L. 1986. Production of trust: institutional sources of economic structure, 1840–1920. In Staw, B. M. and Cummings, L. L. (eds.), Research in organizational behavior:53–111. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×