Aghion P, Tirole J. 1997.

Formal and real authority in

organizations.
Journal of Political Economy
105
(1):
1 – 29

PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY

By examining the organizational mechanisms driving the organizational process

The purpose of this qualitative, single case study dissertation proposal is to examine how the
organizational mechanisms associated with organizational myopia affected the decision-making
process of decision makers at a global corporation. This dissertation proposal will specifically
examine how organizational structure, organizational culture, and organizational control of
information, organizational mechanisms associated with organizational myopia, affected the
decision-making process of decision makers at a global corporation.

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/bkg/methods/005847ch1.pdf

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf

http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=qualitative&pageid=icb.page340897

FalsIf this is done the examiner will have performed a vital part of his/her job. The Rules of
Criminal Procedure and Rules of Evidence by which our courts function can at times seem to be
a hindrance, but the examiner should not loose sight of the fact that the rules have been
developed over a long period of time and are in place to assure both sides a fair trial. The
examiner's role as a witness is essential in most situations. The credibility of the examiner can
make or break many cases; therefore, how the examiner testifies is extremely important. When
the testimony is complete, the parties involved should appreciate the honesty and
professionalism the examiner has displayed.

Colquit (2011) defines mechanisms as activities which directly affect performance and describes
organizational mechanisms as organizational activities which directly affect performance.
Colquit lists organizational structure and organizational culture as the primary organizational
mechanisms activities responsible for organizational performance. The effect of these two
organizational mechanisms cannot be understated

One common element of all systems is described by Kuhn.

System theory also proposed knowing one part of a system enables researcher to gain better
understanding of another part.
 another part. The information content of a "piece of information" is proportional to the amount of
information that can be inferred from the information (A. Kuhn., 1974).

Systems can be either controlled (cybernetic) or uncontrolled. In controlled systems information is

sensed, and changes are effected in response to the information. Kuhn refers to this as the detector,
selector, and effector functions of the system. The detector is concerned with the communication of
information between systems. The selector is defined by the rules that the system uses to make
decisions, and the effector is the means by which transactions are made between systems.
Communication and transaction are the only intersystem interactions. Communication is the exchange of
information, while transaction involves the exchange of matter-energy. All organizational and social
interactions involve communication and/or transaction.

Kuhn's model stresses that the role of decision is to move a system towards equilibrium. Communication
and transaction provide the vehicle for a system to achieve equilibrium. "Culture is communicated,
learned patterns... and society is a collectively of people having a common body and process of culture."
(p. 154, 156) A subculture can be defined only relative to the current focus of attention. When society is
viewed as a system, culture is seen as a pattern in the system. Social analysis is the study of
"communicated, learned patterns common to relatively large groups (of people)." (p. 157)

Alvesson, M. (2012). Understanding organizational culture. Sage.

Catino, M. (2013). Organizational myopia: Problems of rationality and foresight in
organizations. Cambridge University Press.
Chenail, R. J. (2012). Conducting Qualitative Data Analysis: Reading Line-by-Line, but
Analyzing by Meaningful Qualitative Units. Qualitative Report, 17(1), 266-269.
Csaszar, F. A. (2012). Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from
mutual funds. Strategic Management Journal, 33(6), 611-632. doi:10.1002/smj.1969
Dalton, D., Todor, W., Spendolini, M., Fielding, G., and Porter, L. (1980). Organization
Structure and Performance: A Critical Review
The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Jan., 1980), pp. 49-64
Friedman, B. D., & Allen, K. N. (1997). Systems theory. Theory and practice, 3-17.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2010). Designing qualitative research. Sage.
Matieu, S, Puiu, V., and Puiu, G. (2013). A possible design model of the organizational culture.
Revista Academiei Fortelor Terestre, 18(2), 171-175.
Pajunen, K. (2008). The nature of organizational mechanisms. Organization Studies, 29(11),
1449-1468.
Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis:
Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & health sciences, 15(3),
398-405.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage publications.

(Catino, 2013). (Pajuen, 2008)