Overcoming Defense Mechanisms
Work Product 1: An Overview of Concepts from Etzioni, Parsons, and Trist
Marie “Terry” Anderson
The University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Abstract
This paper explores the definitions and significance of organizational cohesion, action systems, compliance, culture of tradition, complete concrete systems, and symbolism in the context of organizational theory and organizational defense systems. Research draws on articles presented by Etzioni, Parsons, and Trist, as well as Argyris, Fuller and Barnett, Hogg and Terry, Ogbonna and Harris, Reagans and McEvily, Santos and Eisenbardt, Sciulli, and Tyndall. Practical implications of each term are included for the benefit of organizations interested in applying theory in practice. Key words: organizational cohesion, action systems, compliance, culture of tradition, complete concrete systems, and symbolism
Organizational Cohesion
According to Etzioni (1961), cohesion can be defined as a positive expressive relationship among two or more actors that can reinforce negative and positive norms (p. ). He further differentiates cohesion bonds between persons of the same rank, peer cohesion, and cohesion bonds between persons of different ranks, hierarchical cohesion.
The degree to which peer cohesion exists within an organization can determine how readily norms that are held by the majority of a given group or held by the most influential persons within a group will be accepted by the remaining group participants. In other words, peer cohesion dictates the degree to which actors within a given group are likely to mimic or adopt each other’s behavior and/or values. It has also been suggested by Homans (1951), that there is a direct correlation between the frequency and endurance of interaction within a group and the level of a group’s cohesiveness. In other words, the more group participants interact, the more likely it is that they will adopt each other’s mannerisms, outlooks, or orientations toward the
Marie “Terry” Anderson
The University of North Carolina at Wilmington
Abstract
This paper explores the definitions and significance of organizational cohesion, action systems, compliance, culture of tradition, complete concrete systems, and symbolism in the context of organizational theory and organizational defense systems. Research draws on articles presented by Etzioni, Parsons, and Trist, as well as Argyris, Fuller and Barnett, Hogg and Terry, Ogbonna and Harris, Reagans and McEvily, Santos and Eisenbardt, Sciulli, and Tyndall. Practical implications of each term are included for the benefit of organizations interested in applying theory in practice. Key words: organizational cohesion, action systems, compliance, culture of tradition, complete concrete systems, and symbolism
Organizational Cohesion
According to Etzioni (1961), cohesion can be defined as a positive expressive relationship among two or more actors that can reinforce negative and positive norms (p. ). He further differentiates cohesion bonds between persons of the same rank, peer cohesion, and cohesion bonds between persons of different ranks, hierarchical cohesion.
The degree to which peer cohesion exists within an organization can determine how readily norms that are held by the majority of a given group or held by the most influential persons within a group will be accepted by the remaining group participants. In other words, peer cohesion dictates the degree to which actors within a given group are likely to mimic or adopt each other’s behavior and/or values. It has also been suggested by Homans (1951), that there is a direct correlation between the frequency and endurance of interaction within a group and the level of a group’s cohesiveness. In other words, the more group participants interact, the more likely it is that they will adopt each other’s mannerisms, outlooks, or orientations toward the