Cited by 1,111Management and Organizational StudiesManagement Theory and PracticeContemporary Sociological Theory and Practice

Formal Organizations: A Comparative Approach

Blau, Peter M., Scott, W. Richard·1962·Stanford University Press eBooks

Abstract

Upon its publication in 1962, this book became one of the founding texts of organizational sociology. Bringing together diverse approaches, it presented a new focus of interest: the formal organization. Blau and Scott raised the level of analysis from attention solely on individual participants and work groups to a broader understanding of organizations as collective actors. In the book, the authors reviewed multiple types of studies—including case studies, experimental research, and surveys—and integrated them to define new central themes. They used their own empirical studies of two social welfare agencies to illustrate the ways in which varying organizational contexts shape work group and participant attitudes and activities. Formal Organizations served to integrate research on both formal and informal systems, authority and leadership, and stressed the importance of links to the wider environment. This reissue, which includes a new introduction by Scott, makes this seminal work accessible to a new generation of scholars and practitioners.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1515/9780804767361

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Weber's conception spurred a rich tradition of comparative organizational analyses of patterns of bureaucracy and typologies conceiving types of organizations as clusters of attributes.

    “which spurned a rich tradition of comparative organizational analyses of 'patterns' of bureaucracy (Gouldner, 1954) and typologies conceiving 'types' of organizations as clusters of attributes (e.g., Blau & Scott, 1962; Etzioni, 1961).”

    From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Blau & Scott, 1962

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R.
Venue
Stanford University Press eBooks
Published
1962-01-01
OpenAlex
W4298356175
Cited by
1,111
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 33
FWCI
20.67
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Stanford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management Theory and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice
Keywords
formal organizations, sociology of organizations, collective action, authority, leadership, work teams, social welfare agencies, organizational context, informal systems

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