Issues in the creation of organizations: initiation, innovation, and institutionalization.
Issues in the creation of organizations: initiation, innovation, and institutionalization.
复制标题
DOI：
10.5465/255737
复制
发表时间：
1979-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
John R. Kimberly
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
John R. Kimberly
金伯利介绍了一所创新医学院的诞生和早期发展的案例研究。1971年开学时，现有的86所医学院都提供类似的课程：在报告厅和实验室进行两年的基础科学培训，然后在临床环境中与患者直接接触两年。在这所新学校，学生们只在第一年接受教育。在第二年，每个学生都被分配到一名社区医生，担任顾问，并与学生讨论患有该学生目前正在学习的疾病的患者。现有证据表明，学校的创新课程受到学生的欢迎，他们在标准化年终考试中的表现与同龄人一样好。作者发现，从组织的角度来看，这所医学院的案例特别令人感兴趣：(1)这所学校的早期发展是由第一任院长的创业活动、雄心、愿景、优势和弱点决定的；(2)学校的新颖性导致的不确定性迫使个人承担新的角色，并面临不明确的绩效标准；(3)创新学校向制度化学校的过渡是有问题的，因为它改变了决策过程。作者认为，导致一个组织早期成功的因素与那些导致长期成功的因素是不同的。他说，一个新的组织创造了新的规范、价值观和程序，而现有组织的元素在既定的文化中相互作用。他的结论是，组织诞生是一种相对鲜为人知的现象，但它可能是未来发展的重要制约因素。主张对组织的诞生、生存和死亡进行比较分析。
Kimberly presents a case study of the birth and early development of an innovative medical school. When the school opened in 1971, the existing 86 medical schools all offered similar programs: two years of basic science training in lecture halls and laboratories, followed by two years of direct contact with patients in clinical settings. In the new school, students were taught didactically only during the first year. During the second year, each student was assigned to a community physician who acted as an advisor and who discussed with students those patients afflicted with the diseases the student was currently studying. Available evidence indicated that the school's innovative curriculum was favorably received by the students and that they performed as well as their peers on standardized year-end exams. The author found the case of this medical school to be of particular interest from an organizational viewpoint in that: (1) the early development of the school was shaped by the first dean's entrepreneurial activity, ambitions, visions, strengths, and weaknesses; (2) the uncertainty resulting from the school's novelty forced individuals to assume new roles and face unclear performance criteria; and (3) the transition of an innovative school to an institutionalized one was problematic because it modified the decision-making process. The author suggests that those things which lead to an organization's success during its early years are not the same as those that lead to longer-run success. He says that a new organization creates new norms, values, and procedures whereas the elements of an existing organization interact within an established culture. He concludes that organizational birth is a phenomenon about which relatively little is known, but which may be an important constraint on later development. A comparative analysis of the birth, life, and death of organization is advocated.