Abstract
Application of Ackoff’s typology of systems to the concept of decentralization shows that at least two types of decentralization can be distinguished. Decentralization 1.0 is the well-known traditional type developed in the context of the classical command-and-control paradigm, and has a top-down character. By contrast, Decentralization 2.0 evolves from a different set of basic assumptions and values, the enabling-and-autonomy paradigm, which is more bottom-up oriented. The Law of Requisite Variety irrefutably stipulates that in order to cope with increasing environmental chaos and complexity, corporations must evolve towards higher-variety organizational forms characterized by this different type of decentralization. History has shown that early adopters of a new decentralization concept have often reaped enormous benefits.
This entry was originally published on Palgrave Connect under ISBN 978-1-137-49190-9. The content has not been changed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackoff, R.L. 1994. The democratic corporation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ackoff, R.L. 1999. Re-creating the corporation: A design of organizations for the 21st century. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ackoff, R.L., and F.E. Emery. 1972. On purposeful systems. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Ashby, R.W. 1956. An introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman & Hall.
Boehm, C. 2001. Hierarchy in the forest: The evolution of egalitarian behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Broekstra, G. 2002. A synergetics approach to disruptive innovation. Kybernetes: The International Journal of Systems & Cybernetics 31: 1249–1259.
Broekstra, G. 2014. Building high-performance, high-trust organizations: Decentralization 2.0. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chandler Jr., A.D. 1962. Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Chandler Jr., A.D. 1977. The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Collins, J. 2001. Good to great: Why some companies make the leap … others don’t. New York: HarperCollins.
Drucker, P.F. 1980. Managing in turbulent times. London: William Heinemann.
Drucker, P. F. [1946] 1972. Concept of the corporation. New York: New American Library.
Eldredge, N. 1999. The pattern of evolution. New York: Freeman and Company.
Ghoshal, S., and C.A. Bartlett. 1997. The individualized corporation: A fundamentally new approach to management. New York: HarperCollins.
Mintzberg, H. 1983. Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Mintzberg, H. 1987. Crafting strategy. Harvard Business Review 65: 66–75.
Mintzberg, H. 2009. Rebuilding companies as communities. Harvard Business Review, July–August, 1–5.
Moore, J.F. 1996. The death of competition: Leadership and strategy in the age of business ecosystems. Chichester: Wiley.
Pennsylvania Railroad. 1858. Organization for conducting the business of the road, adopted December 26, 1857. Philadelphia: Crissy & Markley Printers.
Sloan Jr., A.P. 1963. My years with general motors. New York: Doubleday & Company.
Wallander, J. 2003. Decentralization – Why and how to make it work: The Handelsbanken way. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.
Weber, M. 1947. The theory of social and economic organization. London: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this entry
Cite this entry
Broekstra, G. (2016). Decentralization. In: Augier, M., Teece, D. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_726-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_726-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-94848-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Business and ManagementReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences