New Institutional Theory - Essay Example

New Institutional Theory Name Course Name and Code Date Organisations and institutions exist due to specified requirements. These organisations become successful because of effective leadership and managerial approaches that factors into consideration numerous environmental factors and requirements. The aim of this section is to address applicability of some theories on different fields and sectors with the aim of arguing for new institutional theory as the most appropriate approach towards fulfilling organisational and managerial requirements. The basis of the essay is analyses of balanced scorecard application within management accounting relative to some frameworks. Some of the framework employed include organisational theory, information system, research approach and management view. The organisational theory perspective is premised on classical theory whereby organisations should operate in a manner that follows strict organisational structure. Employees within such organisations are expected to be passive, subordinate and dependent (Bischoff, 2011). This means the employees cannot control their working lives because they have to request for assistance and permissions from the managerial structures and without employing such factors may be constituted as indiscipline. This brings into consideration argument of efficiency (Barrett, Kurzman & Shanahan, 2006). Organisational championing organisational structures and focuses in efficiency and devise strategies such as working longer hours with minimal pay does not mean the completed work is within specified quality requirements. The organisational theory views an organisation as a cabinet of drawers; everything should fit into its place else it becomes untidy and this component is associated with organisations that employ organisational theory (Crowther and Green, 2004). If one characteristic does not operate efficiently, the entire organisation cannot operate in unison resulting in ineffectiveness in the organisation (Scott, 2004). Therefore, each employee within the organisation and each system should operate effectively to ensure the organisation succeeds in its operations. Hence, hierarchical principle is encouraged to ensure success of the operations (Koslowski, 2010). In addition, organisational theory prepares an individual to fail because of the working conditions (Sunday, 2012). The conditions are a conducive environment to psychological failure because of the attitudes and approaches in which employees must follow. Employees are treated as infants rather that allowing them operate in a mature manner (Hatch, 2012). Employees are employed because of their capacity and capability to accomplish specified tasks and it is convincible if a person is ask to accomplish a task based on directive of an individual that has no clear understanding on the matter (Tompkins, 2005). This type of psychological orientation is a recipe for failure (Robinson, 2010). The balance scorecard model aims to create a learning organisation that champions growths and mobilisation of non-financial components in ensuring the business becomes successful. The organisational theory illustrates that an organisation is inert and should follow the views of management but in the case of a balanced scorecard, the management strategies on how to maximise on resources available to assist both the organisation and the employees. The employees are encouraged to learn and utilise their own capacities to fulfil the operations of the organisation. System theory is premised on generalisation of laws and principles across various systems (Hill and Jones, 2012). A system is a group of elements that operates in a manner, whether dependently or interdependently, to reach a specified conclusion (Cunliffe and Luhman, 2012). This means a system is a subsystem of systems towards fulfilling a given obligation. Despite the numerous factors associated with system theory, the theory has its own critics (Adetube, 2011). The theory does not specify how and when collaboration with the organisation should be take place or situations whereby conflicts are potential or they exist among the structure of the organisation, work environment, work and organisational environment. This problem can be solved by the use of balanced scorecard because it incorporates numerous metrics in ensuring the system operates effectively. System theory does not address potential and uncertain issues that may affect an organisation. This is attributed to the claim that the organisation and its environment are distinct in nature. Bringing an organisation that has numerous communications and interaction lines is hard including those organisations that become intermingled resulting ion complex situations (Brigham and Ehrhardt, 2011). This view is contrary to the benefits associated to balance scorecard because it creates the platform and framework in which activities can be accomplished. Therefore, information system theory should be modified based on contexts and within the precedents of range and velocity and those choices that overpower predictability and stability. In addition, the system theory does not provide direct guidance to which functions within the system should be worked on to achieve policy objectives. Conversely, the balanced scorecard presents a platform in which four important components are brought into consideration supporting each section of the organisation towards achieving organisation requirements. The theory does not address when constituents of a system does not operate as envisioned. This is attributed to relationship between an organisation and a living creature analogy. Organisations do not operate or occur naturally in nature but they are contrived by humans. This means that it can be established to fulfil a specific objective that may not sustain the organisation in generality. In such a capacity, it is hard for organisations employing systemic theory in encouraging change. The emphasis on feedback, environment, adaptive response and boundary associated management as a control centre which controls and directs an organisations towards fulfilling a specified goal. From the analysis, it is important to utilise a model, which is transformative in nature to achieve the desired goals. Another model that is ineffective is the management discipline approach. The management theory was promoted by engineers and other concerned bodies that were interested in ensuring there contributions and capacities are extend into the fields of planning and management. These bodies had complained that there roles were not sustainable from a management point of view because characteristics of management were increasingly becoming more disconnected from their specified productive expertise. These types of theories are prescriptive in that it had implicit belief that underlined principles that governed management functions and assumptions. The theory views that every organisation is the same and activities should be done more the same or alike. Many organisations are grouped together such as charities, voluntary organisations and political organisations, which may be defined differently due to differing structural elements and hence managerial approach should consider these factors to ensure it operates optimally. Therefore, from the perspective of managerial discipline, numerous factors are evidenced and it is not possible for a single theory to be applied to all the organisations indiscriminately. Organisations that operate socially are characterised by their degree of inter-dependence, complexity, objectives, functions, openness, balance and multiplicity of purposes. The problem with a research organisation is its complexity in that it consists of numerous groups, individuals, departments that operate as a subsystem within the bigger system (Denhardt, 2010). The numerous subsystems inhibit the way the organisation operates and due to these reasons, it is easier for an organisation to make a mistake. These departments and subsystems are interdependent as each subsystem has its requirements, behaviour and working requirements. Such approach does not encourage teamwork since each department operates based on its internal policies and culture. In addition, a research organisation is supposed to operate in an open manner to fulfil the goals, requirements and functions of the larger organisation (Miles, 2012). If this relationship is not maintained, chances exist of conflicts between the different subsystems. Moreover, research organisations are dynamic in nature and therefore it is imperative to ensure balance is encouraged within and outside the organisation. This balanced requirement ensures smooth operation and functioning else causes numerous chaoses (Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis, 2011). Similarly, a research organisation is a multiplicity of functions, purpose and objectives. Different departments or employees have roles that they have to fulfil but those individuals with similar roles but coming from different subsystems may result in conflicts. From the analysis, these theories have numerous weaknesses and shortcomings that prevent clearer understanding on how organisations operate and how they are managed. It is important to formulate an appropriate framework to bring into consideration these diverse factors into forming the most appropriate framework. The proposed framework is the new institutional theory. Institutional theory analyses the more resilient and deeper aspects that forms a social structure. It brings into consideration the processes that structures such as norms, rules, schemas and routes are established with the aim of guiding social behaviour (Pierce and Jussila, 2011). Institutional theory inquires into how these different factors are diffused, created and utilised and how these factors decline and become disused. The institutional theory is aimed at encouraging and championing conformity and also to address components associated with change and conflict in social structures. New institutional theory incorporates most of information within the balanced scorecard and understands the importance of learning and growth. Institutional theory is important because it is able to address numerous structures and systems ranging from macro global frameworks to micro interpersonal interactions (Thornton, 2004). This means that organisations operate based on normative pressures that sometimes arise from external sources and internal sources (Burke, 2010). In certain conditions, organisations that employ such structures are guided by professional certification, operation procedures and other important requirements such as legislations (Shukula, 2008). Therefore, institutional theory is important in understanding how an organisation operates based on elements and factors that govern their operations. In conclusion, theories govern the way things operate and how they are accomplished. Some theories are applicable to specific operational requirements while others bring together numerous factors. However, some theories are not applicable due to obsoleteness while other theories changes based on environmental and operational requirements. Different theories are applicable to managerial, organisation, research and informational systems. However, these different theories cannot fulfil the requirements of evolving organisations and therefore, new institutional theory is important in such a scenario. Therefore, balanced scorecard is important in addressing the numerous weaknesses associated with other theories. The approach taken by balanced scorecard is similar to the new institutional theory. New institutional theory understands the changing organisational requirements brining into consideration numerous cultures and structures towards fulfilling organisational operations. References Adetube, P. 2011. The Handbook on Management Theories. London: AuthorHouse Barrett, D., Kurzman, C., & Shanahan, S. 2006. Coreless diffusion: Export-only policies for population control. School of Social Work, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Bischoff, A. 2011. Modern Perspectives on Organization Theories: And its controversy of theory and practice. New York: GRIN Verlag Brigham, E., and Ehrhardt, M. 2011. Financial Management: Theory and Practice. London: Cengage Learning Burke, W. 2010. Organization Change: Theory and Practice. New York: Sage Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., and Pitsis, T. 2011. Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. London: Sage Crowther, D., and Green, M. 2004. Organisational Theory. New York: CIPD Publishing Cunliffe, A., and Luhman, J. 2012. Key Concepts in Organization Theory. New York: Sage Denhardt, R. 2010. Theories of Public Administration. London: Cengage Learning Hatch, M. 2012. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press Hill, C., and Jones, G. 2012. Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach, 10th ed.: An Integrated Approach. London: Cengage Learning Koslowski, P. 2010. Elements of a Philosophy of Management and Organisation. London: Springer Miles, J. 2012. Management and Organization Theory: A Jossey-Bass Reader. New York: John Wiley & Sons Pierce, J., and Jussila, L. 2011. Psychological Ownership and the Organizational Context: Theory, Research Evidence, and Application. London: Edward Elgar Publishing Robinson, M. 2010. Sport Club Management. New York: Human Kinetics Scott, W. 2004. “Institutional theory.” Pp. 408-14 in Encyclopedia of Social Theory, George Ritzer, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Shukula, M. 2008. Understanding organisations: organisational theory and practice in India. New York: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Sunday, N. 2012. Organisational Theory & Practice: Management Made Simple. London: GRIN Verlag Thornton, P. 2004. Markets from Culture: Institutional Logics and Organizational Decisions in Higher Education Publishing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Tompkins, J. 2005. Organization theory and public management. New York: Thomson Wadsworth Read More