The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Process of Organizational Death: Disbanding and Reconnecting
Abstract
I thank Reginald Bruce, Stanley Harris, and Susan Schurman for helping me gather these data. I thank Janice Beyer, Richard Daft, Thomas D'Aunno, Daniel Denison, Leonard Greenhalgh, Richard Hackman, Robert Kahn, Gerald Ledford, Debra Meyerson, Marina Park, Richard Price, John Van Maanen, Janet Weiss, and Mayer Zald for their help with this manuscript. I also wish to thank the ASQ editors and reviewers for their good advice. Portions of this paper were prepared while I was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. I am grateful for financial support provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. A qualitative and inductive study of eight organizational death is used to develop a model of how some dying organizations make the transition to death. The model focuses on the relationship between a dying organization and its members and on how leaders help orchestrate changes in the socially defined reality that members share about the organization's viability. The paper shows how the announcement that organizational death will occur encourages members to begin dismantling their organization. A key finding is that, contrary to leaders' predictions, members' efforts will often remain constant or increase after a closing is announced. A model to explain this phenomenon is created. The process of organizational death proposed here seems to best describe unambiguous organizational deaths that are announced in advance, those in which the organizations are dismantled through the efforts of their members, and those not characterized by severe conflict over the distribution of resources and obligations.'
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
Cited by
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
From the Editors: What Grounded Theory is Not
Suddaby, R. (2006) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2006.22083020 · Cited by 2,859
Orlikowski, W. J. (1993) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249774 · Cited by 1,512
The Effects of Job Insecurity on Psychological Health and Withdrawal: A Longitudinal Study
Dekker, S. W. A., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1995) · Australian Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00050069508259607 · Cited by 524
Immersion, Emergence and Reflexivity: Grounded Theory and Aesthetic Consumption
Goulding, C., & Saren, M. (2010) · International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research · doi:10.1108/17506181011024779 · Cited by 24
Organizational Contexts and Contingent Leadership Roles: A Theoretical Exploration
Egglestonl, K. K., & Bhagat, R. S. (1993) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872679304601002 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Sutton, R. I.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1987-12
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 542
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2328216638
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.