The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Formal and Informal Hierarchy in Different Types of Organization
Open accessAbstract
This paper addresses the paradox that despite all organizational change towards flatter and postmodern organizations, hierarchical order is quite persistent. We develop a differentiated understanding of hierarchy as either formal or informal and apply this analytical framework to several types of organization. The analysis reveals that hierarchy is much more widespread than thought; in particular, postmodern, representative democratic and network organizations are much less ‘alternative’ and ‘hierarchy-free’ than their labels and common understanding may suggest. The main argument is that the persistence of hierarchy in different types of organization can be explained by different dynamic relationships between formal and informal hierarchy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor
Abbott, A. (1988) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226189666.001.0001 · Cited by 7,733
Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Control in Self-Managing Teams
Barker, J. R. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393374 · Cited by 2,305
Social Dominance Theory: Its Agenda and Method
Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00401.x · Cited by 618
Cited by
Competing logics in a hybrid organization: ICT service provision in the Italian health care sector
Maran, L., & Lowe, A. (2022) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/aaaj-12-2019-4334 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Diefenbach, T., & Sillince, J. A. A.
- Venue
- Organization Studies
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-11
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1515-1537
- ISSN
- 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3044
- OpenAlex
- W2026999166
- Cited by
- 310
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 28.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
