ABSTRACT
It has certainly become a well-established feature of the sociology of organizations that organization structures are largely explained with reference to the size, technology, and task environment of organizations. This approach is most eminently presented by Pugh et al. (1969), Blau and Schoenherr (1971), Child (1973), Woodward (1965), among others, and it has become intertwined with the contingency theory of organizations, as formulated by Lawrence and Lorsch (1967), Perrow (1971), or, at an earlier stage, Burns and Stalker (1961). There has been a discussion about the relative importance of explanatory variables, which has to some extent been settled by Hickson et al. (1969), and Child and Mansfield (1972). But despite the formally rigorous procedures employed, and the conceptual closeness of the researchers, inconsistencies remain. Thus, the conflicting views on the relationship between the structural dimensions of Structuring of activities’ and ‘centralization’, as put forward by Pugh et al. (1968), on the one hand, and Child (1973) and Mansfield (1973), on the other, could not be resolved empirically. Attempts at reconciliation on the basis of empirical reanalysis by Donaldson, Child, and Aldrich (1975) do not appear to have led to a conclusive interpretation of the differences.
