The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis
Abstract
The authors argue in this book that social theory can usefully be conceived in terms of four broad paradigms, based upon different sets of meta-theoretical assumptions with regard to the nature of social science and the nature of society. The four paradigms - Functionalist, Interpretive, Radical Humanist and Radical Structuralist - derive from quite distinct intellectual traditions, and present four mutually exclusive views of the social work. Each stands in its own right, and generates its own distinctive approach to the analysis of social life. The authors provide extensive reviews of the four paradigms, tracing the evolution and inter-relationships between the various sociological schools of thought within each. They then proceed to relate theories of organisation to this wider background. This book covers a great range of intellectual territory. It makes a number of important contributions to our understanding of sociology and organisational analysis, and will prove an invaluable guide to theorists, researchers and students in a variety of social science disciplines. It stands as a discourse in social theory, drawing upon the general area of organisation studies - industrial sociology, organisation theory, organisational psychology, and industrial relations - as a means of illustrating more general sociological themes. In addition to reviewing and evaluating existing work, it provides a framework for appraising future developments in the area of organisational analysis, and suggests the form which some of these developments are likely to take.
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
Scott, T., Mannion, R., Davies, H., & Marshall, M. (2003) · Health Services Research · doi:10.1111/1475-6773.00154 · Cited by 630
Action Research is Similar to Design Science
Järvinen, P. (2007) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-005-5427-1 · Cited by 340
Inclusive education ten years after Salamanca: Setting the agenda
Ainscow, M., & César, M. (2006) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/bf03173412 · Cited by 320
Can social systems be autopoietic? Assessing Luhmann's social theory
Mingers, J. (2002) · The Sociological Review · doi:10.1111/1467-954x.00367 · Cited by 160
The state of affairs: Critical performativity and the online dating industry
Roscoe, P., & Chillas, S. (2014) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508413485497 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Burrell, G., & Morgan, G.
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2017-03-02
- OpenAlex
- W4242701311
- Cited by
- 792
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 46.60
- Type
- book
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781315242804
- The paper
- Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (2017). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315242804
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.