ABSTRACT
Intheadvancedindustrializedeconomies,uptothe1980sthedominant organizationalmodelinthebusinessandpublicservicesectorsalikewas theengineeringorbureaucraticmodelofthesmooth-runningmachineor system.Managerssawtheirroleasmaintainingandimprovingtheorganization'smechanismsandprocedures,andifnecessary'trouble-shooting'breakdownsinthesystem.Shouldsuchbreakdownspresentapersistentpattern, thenmanagers'responsewastodevisearoutineortechniquewhichrestored organizationalfunctioningtoasteadystate,ifnottotheoriginalstateasfar aspossible.Subsequently,managerssoughttore-establishcontrolandto achieveadegreeofaccuracyinforecastingfutureorganizationaloperation andperformance(Mintzberg,1979).Inotherwords,theyfollowedHarold Geneen'sfamousdictum'Nosurprises!'whichasChiefExecutiveOfficer (CEO)heapplieddraconianallyatInternationalTelephoneandTelegraph (ITT),theinternationalconglomerate(Sampson,1973).Theunderlying assumptionofsuchanorganizationalparadigmwasthatthecontrolledand predictableorganizationalmachinecouldbecreated,andthatitwoulddeliver high-qualityperformanceineconomicterms.Notonlythat,suchanorganizationwouldeventuallyremovethepressureuponmanagersarisingfrom operationalcrises,breakdownsandmalfunctions,asaresultofquasiomniscientcontrolandcomprehensiveaccurateforecasting.Theevidence
which came from within ITT however, ran to the contrary, with high levels of interpersonal conflict among top management, traumatic board meetings and a large proportion of personally-troubled CEOs of ITT subsidiary companies.
