Post an analysis of one organizational theory. In your analysis, describe the main idea of the theory and its strengths and limitations as applied to so

26 2 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF ORGANIZATIONS

Table 2.1 Operating Authority of Human Service Organizations

Type ofOrganization Operating Authority

Nonprofit Incorporation in the state or locality in which it operates, with a charter, constitution, and bylaws Has its own governing body and/or is organized as an identified organization of a religious body with legal status or is an identified organization of another legal entity that is recognized under the laws of the jurisdiction

Public Authorized and established by statute or is a subunit of a public organization with which a clear administrative relationship exists

For-profit (proprietary) Organized as a legal entity as a corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, or association and has a charter, partnership agreement, or articles of association and a constitution and bylaws

Source: Adapted from Council on Accreditation (2020).

Putting Theory to Practice

Before we explore the types of organizations that you will find, we will briefly explore organizational theory. We want you to become familiar with some of the theories that have influenced the development of human service organiza­ tions and that may serve to influence your thinking if you ever are called upon to develop new programs or agencies. Often, practitioners and students in various human service disciplines distrust theory, viewing theories as being disconnected from real life or mere abstractions of practice situations. An extensive discussion

of theory is beyond the purpose of this book, but we want to at least help you

become more familiar with organizational theory and consider its influence upon agencies.

A good theory is extremely practical. Theories are not merely hypothetical concoctions of abstract ideas. Good theories connect different real-world fac­

tors; they show the relationships between real events, real people, and real social forces (Howe, 2017). A good theory allows us to explain, and often predict, how people and institutions respond. One of my favorite ways of thinking about theo­

ries is to think of them as a travel app such as Yelp or a web page site such as TripAdvisor. In truth, you don't always need a travel app, or even an old school travel guidebook. If you are in familiar territory, going somewhere very close by, you might wish to be adventurous and "wing it." But what if you are traveling to a faraway land where they do not speak your language and all the signs and symbols are incomprehensible? Yes, you could probably handle the basics, find a place to

27 Putting Theory to Practice

stay and decent restaurants, but think of how much more difficult that might be. A good travel app will not only help you find a place to stay and a place to eat but also help you choose places to visit based upon your needs and desires. There are many different travel apps or guidebooks, and each has its strengths and will be geared toward a different type of traveler.

Theories are like travel apps in that while they may not be 100 percent neces­ sary (at least some seem to feel this way), they help you make good choices for the activities that you will engage in. Learning a theory or multiple theories provides you with different ways of approaching and thinking about different situations. They help you be more efficient and avoid certain mistakes. Theories can help you see situations in new lights, learn the rules, and determine why you may wish to follow some "rules" sometimes and break some rules at other times.

Max Weber, the father of organizational theory, died in 1920, and although he lived in an earlier century, his ideas are still important because they have influ­ enced a good deal of modern organizational theory. In fact, you will find much of how we view typical organizations depicted well by Weber. Don't be put off by older theories-the best ones have staying power.

Weber was the first to focus on the nature of bureaucracies. He was concerned with the way that power and authority existed within organizations. He made a distinction between the two, noting that power relies upon force to compel individuals to adhere to organizational rules, while legitimate authority creates the conditions whereby individuals comply with organizational needs willingly. Weber (1997) noted that the most appropriate metaphor for an organization was the machine. He presented a description of what an organization should look like in his articulation of the "rational legal bureaucracies." This idealized organization consisted of the following, smoothly running, machine-like attributes: author­ ity based on clearly delineated rules, which trump informal social relationships; clearly defined hierarchies; well-developed and highly specific lines of responsibil­ ity; formalized rules and regulations; a high degree of specialization and technical competence; and promotion based on performance. In Weber's mechanistic orga­ nization, all rules and regulations should be written down, and all members of the organization should understand these rules.

Weber stressed the importance of uniformity and stability in terms of work performance and expectations. To Weber, smooth-running bureaucracies are ones in which clear lines of authority are presented, and roles and responsibilities are logical and clear.

Many large human service organizations are based on this rationalist, bureau­ cratic model (Flanigan, 2019). In fact, many human service organizations are actually more typical of Weber's ideal than are many modern businesses. There are several consequences of this adherence to this model. First, many large, intensely bureaucratic human service organizations often feel rigid and lifeless and do not encourage innovation and creativity. During times of change and transformation, when community needs are affected by rapid changes in a world greatly influenced

28 2 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF ORGANIZATIONS

by global factors, this can be highly problematic. For example, a large child welfare organization was having a difficult time serving a new immigrant population. The group of immigrants did not fit easily into the model of delivery-office visits­ and did not relate to the services provided. Given the bureaucracy's tendency to be self-perpetuating, many in the agency seemed to find fault in their new clients and not in their own highly restricted manner of functioning.

Understanding classic organizational theory provides us with an important sense of where the study of organizations and management originated. Based on these early studies, scholars and practitioners from various fields representing many different perspectives have continued the development of research and the­ ory. In reaction to this classic approach to organizations, more progressive models began to be developed in the 1960s in human service organizations.

The use of the terms progressive and radical has become increasingly contro­ versial during the past several decades. In general, the human services, mirror­ ing the society in general, have become increasingly conservative. Evidence-based practice, the medicalization of human services, and other forces have led us to view individuals as the primary focus of change, not institutions. Progressive approaches to macro practice focus on transforming the structural and social fac­ tors that inhibit the growth and development of individuals, families, and small groups in the context of organizations (Knight & Gitterman, 2018). In general, one can say that the progressive viewpoint is that people are not the problem, but that systems are problems or, perhaps more correctly, structural dynamics embedded within systems are the problem. As such, radical perspectives of orga­ nizational theories are ones that highlight the oppressive nature of social institu­ tions and encourage the transformation of organizations to remove barriers of oppression (Turner, 2017).

One progressive perspective that has had significant influence over organiza­ tional theory is feminist theory. According to feminist organizational theorists, the fundamental problem within most human service organizations, and with organizational theory, is the centrality of hierarchy (Benschop & Verloo, 2015). Feminist organizational theorists and practitioners seem to be somewhat split on whether or not any hierarchy in organizations is necessary, but what is clear is that they believe that an overemphasis on hierarchy and authority has deleterious effects on organizations. Feminist theorists have tried to develop various mod­ els as alternatives. Feminist managers tend to work toward a flat organizational structure where decisions are based upon collaborative and consensus models of decision making.

Contrasting greatly to progressive approaches is evidence-based practice (EBP), an approach that has grained increasingly influence and acceptance in human ser­ vice practice as well as social work education (O'Hare, 2015). EBP is a movement that started in the medical field (Drisko & Grady, 2015). It evolved from the recog­ nition that only a small percentage of actual medical decisions that doctors made were based on current available research and fact. Doctors instead relied on what

29 Types of Organizations

they learned in school many years ago, unproven traditions, their own experience, and generally preferred methods.

In EBP, practitioners select, if available, interventions that have been validated by systematic research and evaluation (Drisko & Grady, 2019). More recently, var­ ious researchers, theorists, and practitioners have turned their attention toward the application of EBP principles to leadership and organizational management. Some evidence suggests that managers are even less likely to use research and evi­ dence than are physicians (Gill, 2018). Therefore, the movement to get managers and leaders to use evidence has led to the development of an evidence-based prac­ tice connected to organizational leadership, management, and development. EBP leaders should engage in the following behaviors: demanding evidence, examin­ ing logic, encouraging experimentation, and engaging in continuous learning. Proponents of evicence based practice that wisdom and experience should not count, but rather that appropriate quality evidence should be privileged over these important leadership skills.

There are many other theories that have strong influence over organizational life. We encourage you to explore these and other theories in depth, as the inter­ nalization of theory and knowledge, combined with your real-life experience, is what helps you develop practice wisdom (which even evidence-based leadership theories find of value).

Types of Organizations

Types of human service organizations (i.e., how they are classified) include a spec­ trum of options, ranging from auspice or legal basis, characteristics of the clients served, and services rendered. Blau and Scott's (1962) seminal work identified four types of organizations under which human services are carried out:

1. Mutual benefit organizations, created by groups wishing to provide services for their own membership (e.g., churches, labor unions, and civil clubs)

2. Governmental or public organizations, established and funded by the general public to perform services that benefit all people

3. Service organizations, established as nongovernmental, nonprofit, voluntary social agencies

4. Business or entrepreneurial organizations, including for-profit organizations and private, non-agency-based practice

Each of the four types delineated by Blau and Scott (1962) can also be defined in terms of their operating authority-their legal standing-as illustrated in Table 2.1.

The operating authority sets the parameters within which the organiza­ tion functions. Organizations are allowed to do certain things-raise money in