Review

Author(s): Thomas W. Wiggins

Review by: Thomas W. Wiggins
Source: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 1 (Mar., 1970), pp. 121-123
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of the Johnson Graduate School of Management,
Cornell University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2391198
Accessed: 14-04-2015 19:03 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sage Publications, Inc. and Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to Administrative Science Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 129.112.109.42 on Tue, 14 Apr 2015 19:03:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS

121

problems such as "the enlargement of competence," "the difficult art of choosing people,"
and "predicting and measuring managerial performance." He takes up organizational climate
as a relevant concept in the consideration of
managerial effectiveness. Gellerman has a talent
for focusing the reader on various crucial issues
which confront managers from the perspective
of the behavioral scientist. He sets out to pursue
an enormously complex enterprise: to identify
motivational levers, which managers can understand and use with a favorable prognosis for
success. He succeeds lucidly and empirically
with a Barnardian sense for relating his assumptions in a manner which suggests their theoretical nature. The validity of his McKinsey Foundation Award for the excellence of Motivation
and Productivity is enhanced by this current
practical sequel, which underscores his earlier
theoretical considerations.
The authors of both volumes are convincing
in their assumptions regarding the desirability
of applying motivation theory to the science of
David J. Hickson management. Litwin and Stringer seem more
Visiting Professor of Organizational Behavior interested in developing a systematic methodology for motivating people in organizations.
University of Alberta
Gellerman is less concerned with motivational
theory as such and more concerned with "a
way of thinking about it." He searches for
Management by Motivation. By Saul W. causes and attempts to relate the causes to
Gellerman. New York: American Manage- events which can stand up under scientific testing. In this regard, effective management by
ment Association, 1968. 286 pp. $9.00.
motivation involves the operation of this "way
Motivation and Organizational Climate. By of thinking about it" notion to practical manGeorge H. Litwin and Robert A. Stringer, agerial problems:

clearly related to defined variables and so to

generalizations. Propositions appear in Zaleznik's conclusion, but they are not directly connected to the case data; they do accord with
current thinking which stresses power as a
critical element in satisfaction and performance,
and therefore link attitudes toward change with
the gain or loss of individual power.
Indeed, the limitations of the questionnaire
and data are such that a book on authority
contains no measure of authority or power or
influence. There is a single 3-point rating of
the respondent's autonomy, a concept so complex that it in itself could account for the
marginal differences found.
A useful summary is given of 6 variables
acting either as prior conditions or concurrent
facilitations of change in attitudes and behavior.
Yet even these are neither related to other work
nor derived from the case. It is unfortunate
that more advantage could not have been taken
of the before-and-after case opportunity.

Jr. Boston: Division of Research, Graduate

School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1968. 214 pp. $6.00.

With it he can anticipate, with some reliability,

how the various actions he might take would affect
the people whose work he directs. It is this habit
of mind, more than "leadership,""human relations,"
These two volumes are substantively similar and even a knowledge of motivational theory itself,
yet methodologicallydifferent in their approach that is the key to a better utilization of human reto the topic of managerialeffectiveness. In Mo- sources.

tivation and OrganizationalClimate, Litwin and

Stringer describe a systematic theory of human
motivation (McCleland-Atkinson) and suggest
how it can be applied to the problems which
managers encounter by means of the concept
organizationalclimate. The authors set forth a
series of devices for measuring motivation and
organizationalclimate, and then report on the
use of the measures in experimentalstudies and
in a series of field studies. Finally, they derive
implications from their research for managers.
Thus, this researchrepresents an interest in applying motivation theory to organizational behavior via an intervening variable-organizational climate.
In Managementby Motivation,Gellermanapplies the concept of motivation to managerial

In other words, Gellerman is more pragmatic

in his suggestion that managers, as behavioral
scientists, concern themselves with the accurate
perception of what conditions in their organizations motivate and demotivate people. He is
interested in motivation theory as it applies to
the accumulated body of research findings,
which have consistent implications about how
people encounter work environments, influential variables which affect the encounter, and
the relationship of the encounter to organizational effectiveness. In this sense his use of the
term theory is inaccurate and unnecessarily suggests the delimitation of applicable behavioral
research to that which has been elevated to the
shrine of the theoretical.

This content downloaded from 129.112.109.42 on Tue, 14 Apr 2015 19:03:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

122

ADMINISTRATIVE

SCIENCE QUARTERLY

Gellerman proposes no explicit model for

managing by motivation; in fact, he doubts that
such a model will ever be devised. Conversely,
Litwin and Stringer conclude their research
report with a framework of four variables or
elements which managers are to consider in
managing motivation:
1. The motives and needs the individuals
bring to the situation;
2. The organizational tasks that must be
performed;
3. The climate that characterizes the work
situation; and
4. The personal strengths and limitations of
the operating manager.
Where Gellerman speaks generally of motivational levers, Litwin and Stringer refer to the
four variables above as representing the leverage points that managers can use to motivate
organizational members. Furthermore, Litwin
and Stringer outline a strategy for managing
motivation which stresses assessment of basic
needs of organizational members, devising ways
to manipulate tasks, the organizational climate,
and managerial style to generate desired outcomes.
Although the Litwin-Stringer framework is
logically derived from the theoretical and conceptual considerations presented in their book,
the strategy model is questionably operational.
For example, if basic needs can be assessed, as
the authors suggest, by thematic apperception
tests, how operationally feasible would it be
to individually administer such tests to organizational members? To what extent can managers
manipulate tasks, the climate, and their managerial styles? There is a body of research to
suggest that organizational climate influences
the behavior of leaders as much, if not more,
than leaders influence organizational climate
(Chase, 1953; Moyer, 1955; Presthus, 1962;
Charters, 1963; Bridges, 1965; and Wiggins,
1969). Gellerman refers to organizational homogenization as he discusses the tendency for
managers to absorb predecessor's beliefs. Zaleznik and Moment (1964) amplified this position
when they suggested that leaders are not completely free to choose their leader styles. The
status of strategies for managerial motivation
or manipulation is characterized by Gellerman
as "complex and fluid." The dynamic and nonrational nature of the basic needs of individual
organizational members, organizational climate,
and managerial style reduces explicit strategies
to presumptuous generalizations. The questions
above are not cited to admonish Litwin and

Stringer; the authors frequently suggest the

heuristic and tentative nature of their conclusions for the practice of administration.
The concept of organizational climate is attracting much attention from writers and researchers in the field of administration. It is
being popularly considered by the behavioral
scientist as an intervening variable which links
a body of knowledge associated with organizational theory and organizational behavior. This
is an encouraging trend insomuch as it may
facilitate a more thorough understanding of the
relationship of the institutional and individual
dimensions of an organization from which one
can more than speculate about organizational
effectiveness.
The meaning of organizational climate is
couched in a priori assumptions analogous to
the concept of human personality. Litwin and
Stringer refer to it as "a set of measurable
properties of the work environment, perceived
directly or indirectly by the people who live
and work in this environment and assumed to
influence their motivation and behavior." They
derive dimensions of organizational climate
from the research literature including Lewin
et al. (1939), Horowitz (1961), McGregor
(1960), and Lawrence and Lorsch (1967).
Gellerman calls organizational climate "the pattern of behavior which the managers and the
managed learn for dealing with each other."
This definition coincides with the operational
definition used by Halpin and Croft (1963) in
their study of the organizational climate of
schools. Although the research methodology
and organizational environments used by Litwin and Stringer and Halpin and Croft were
markedly different, there is a similarity in their
climate dimensions; for example, Halpin and
Croft used thrust and consideration, and Litwin and Stringer include responsibility, warmth,
and support.
The foregoing should, at least, raise hopes
for an empirically credible concept of organizational climate applicable to administrative science in general. Beginning with Argyris (1958),
to the present, there has been general agreement as to the meaning of the concept. The
efforts to specify dimensions for the concept
have produced similar results. The status of
organizational climate as an intervening variable will depend upon future research.
Cellerman calls for "a wide-open willingness
to speculate and a cold-eyed insistence on analysis" on the part of managers in an effort to
invalidate their frequent presumptions that
what is, should be. Both of these volumes underscore the notion that organizations can im-

This content downloaded from 129.112.109.42 on Tue, 14 Apr 2015 19:03:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BOOK REVIEWS
prove their effectiveness as managers become
more perceptive of and begin to operationalize
administrative research and theory.
Thomas W. Wiggins
Associate Professor of Educational Administration
University of Oklahoma
REFERENCES
Argyris, Chris
1958 "Some problems in conceptualizing
organizational climate: a case study
of a bank." Administrative Science
Quarterly, 2:501-520.
Bridges, E. M.
1965 "Bureaucratic role and socialization:
the influence of experience on the
elementary principal." Educational
Administration Quarterly, 1:19-28.
Charters, W. W., Jr.
1963 "The social background of teaching."
In N. L. Gage (ed.), Handbook of
Research on Teaching: 715-813. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Chase, F. S.
1953 "How to meet teachers' expectations
of leadership." Administrator's Notebook, 1: 1-4.
Halpin, A. W., and D. B. Croft
1963 The Organizational Climate of Schools.
Chicago: Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago.
Horowitz, R.
1961 n Achievement Correlates and the
Executive Role. Doctoral dissertation,
Harvard University.
Lawrence, P. R., and J. W. Lorsch
1967 Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration.
Boston: Division of Research, Harvard Business School.
Lewin, K., R. Lippitt, and R. K. White
1939 "Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created 'social climates.'"
Journal of Social Psychology, 10: 271299.
McGregor, D.
1960 The Human Side of Enterprise. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Moyer, D. C.
1955 "Leadership that teachers want." Administrator's Notebook, 3:1-4.
Presthus, R.
1962 The Organizational Society. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf.
Wiggins, T. W.

123

1969

Leader Behavior Characteristics and

Organizational Climate. Working paper, University of Oklahoma.
Zaleznik, S., and D. Moment
1964 The Dynamics of Interpersonal Behavior. New York: John Wiley.

Educational Planning-Programming-Budgeting. By Harry J. Hartley. Englewood

Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968. 290 pp.
$7.95.
This is a disturbing book, and one which
should be closely examined by all who are
interested in educational administration, in
PPBS and systems analysis, and in the uses of
knowledge for better decision-making. The
book is sure to dispel any optimism that educational administrationhas passed the stage of
superficial manuals, that the potentials and
weaknesses of systems analysis and PPBS have
been adequately explored, and that modern
organization theory is sufficiently known to
prevent naivety on directed change of organizational behavior.
The last chapter includes a good, and in
some respects excellent, discussion of some
limitations and problems of PPBS. Worthwhile
also is an experience-basedchapter on budgetary issues of local schools, by Sol Levin. But
the rest of the book raises the question, what
pressures have caused the author-who has
clear insights into the subject matter-to write
a book like this?
Deferring discussion of these pressures till
later, the results of whatever forces shaped the
book are regrettable. Like most of the proliferating literature which tries to present PPBS
and systems analysis to broad groups of practitioners, it fails to take up the basic issues.
Despite the frequent use of the term organization theory and the inclusion of appropriate
readings in the selected references, Hartley
does not view PPBS and systems analysis as an
endeavor to change organizational patterns of
decision-making. The question whether and
how far PPBS and systems analysis are preferred, or at least feasible, approaches to decision improvements in the local school is not
seriously faced. The critical distinction between PPBS and systems analysisas an approach
and frame of appreciationon one hand, and as
a series of techniques and procedures on the
other hand is hardly recognized, nearly all of
content being manual-type recommendationsincluding, even, on how to write clear English
-and procedures (e.g., program structure).

This content downloaded from 129.112.109.42 on Tue, 14 Apr 2015 19:03:52 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions