{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/70440"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/70440","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"The Organizing Dilemma: Individualism, Collectivism, and the Control of Organization","abstract":"The organizing dilemma is a puzzle posed by the dual necessities of social organization and member self-interest. On one hand, modern societies are based on organization, a pattern of interaction which is maintained through member contributions to organizing processes. On the other hand, member self-interest directs attention away from organizational well-being and toward the welfare of that entity defined as "self." The definitions of self with organization members possess stem from childhood socialization, in which language and behaviors are learned that provide implicit self-definitions, and from subsequent acculturation in which self-definitions may be modified by new social information. Two major kinds of self-definition may be adopted. Individualism denotes a definition of self in which selves are defined as distinct individuals, while collectivism refers to a definition in which selves are defined as distinct groups. Depending on members' definitions of self, the organizing dilemma may exist between personal interests and organizational welfare, or between group interests and organizational well-being.","abstract_html":"The organizing dilemma is a puzzle posed by the dual necessities of social organization and member self-interest. On one hand, modern societies are based on organization, a pattern of interaction which is maintained through member contributions to organizing processes. On the other hand, member self-interest directs attention away from organizational well-being and toward the welfare of that entity defined as "self." The definitions of self with organization members possess stem from childhood socialization, in which language and behaviors are learned that provide implicit self-definitions, and from subsequent acculturation in which self-definitions may be modified by new social information. Two major kinds of self-definition may be adopted. Individualism denotes a definition of self in which selves are defined as distinct individuals, while collectivism refers to a definition in which selves are defined as distinct groups. Depending on members' definitions of self, the organizing dilemma may exist between personal interests and organizational welfare, or between group interests and organizational well-being.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Wagner, John A., Iii"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Business Administration","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014-12-15T23:30:14Z","date_published":"2014-12-15T23:30:14Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:02Z","subjects":["Business Administration, General"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["(UMI)AAI8218579"],"render_values":[{"text":"(UMI)AAI8218579","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/70440","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Wagner, John A., Iii"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2014-12-15T23:30:14Z","10000-01-01","1982"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Business Administration"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Business Administration, General"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/70440","(UMI)AAI8218579"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["The organizing dilemma is a puzzle posed by the dual necessities of social organization and member self-interest. On one hand, modern societies are based on organization, a pattern of interaction which is maintained through member contributions to organizing processes. On the other hand, member self-interest directs attention away from organizational well-being and toward the welfare of that entity defined as "self." The definitions of self with organization members possess stem from childhood socialization, in which language and behaviors are learned that provide implicit self-definitions, and from subsequent acculturation in which self-definitions may be modified by new social information. Two major kinds of self-definition may be adopted. Individualism denotes a definition of self in which selves are defined as distinct individuals, while collectivism refers to a definition in which selves are defined as distinct groups. Depending on members' definitions of self, the organizing dilemma may exist between personal interests and organizational welfare, or between group interests and organizational well-being.","The organizing dilemma can be resolved through the use of unilateral or participative control. This dissertation conceptualizes an ideal-typology of four organization forms resolving the organizing dilemma--associations of unilaterally controlled individualists, emergent communions of participatively controlled individualists, residual communions of unilaterally controlled collectivists, and communities of participatively controlled collectivists. Macro organizational characteristics pertaining to interaction patterns, social justice, member mobility, authority differentiation, knowledge distribution, power differences, economic distribution, and organizing process contributions are derived from attributes of the self-definition/control mix characterizing each organization form. Micro process differences related to motivation, leadership, job design, and compensation are based on a cross-cultural analysis of empirical counterparts. Suggestions regarding the identification of American organizational collectivism are offered, and normative paths of change among the four forms of organization are outlined. It is suggested that, in failing to address collectivism, American theorists of organization, organizational behavior, and organizational development have artificially limited their scope of inquiry. The dissertation serves as a first step in reducing this limitation.","Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-15T23:30:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 8218579.pdf: 10060831 bytes, checksum: c68267b2a2225b25957853f467ee4fd8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1982","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 70606 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","268 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1982."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Organizing Dilemma: Individualism, Collectivism, and the Control of Organization"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Wagner, John A., Iii"],"dc:date":["2014-12-15T23:30:14Z","10000-01-01","1982"],"dc:description":["The organizing dilemma is a puzzle posed by the dual necessities of social organization and member self-interest. On one hand, modern societies are based on organization, a pattern of interaction which is maintained through member contributions to organizing processes. On the other hand, member self-interest directs attention away from organizational well-being and toward the welfare of that entity defined as "self." The definitions of self with organization members possess stem from childhood socialization, in which language and behaviors are learned that provide implicit self-definitions, and from subsequent acculturation in which self-definitions may be modified by new social information. Two major kinds of self-definition may be adopted. Individualism denotes a definition of self in which selves are defined as distinct individuals, while collectivism refers to a definition in which selves are defined as distinct groups. Depending on members' definitions of self, the organizing dilemma may exist between personal interests and organizational welfare, or between group interests and organizational well-being.","The organizing dilemma can be resolved through the use of unilateral or participative control. This dissertation conceptualizes an ideal-typology of four organization forms resolving the organizing dilemma--associations of unilaterally controlled individualists, emergent communions of participatively controlled individualists, residual communions of unilaterally controlled collectivists, and communities of participatively controlled collectivists. Macro organizational characteristics pertaining to interaction patterns, social justice, member mobility, authority differentiation, knowledge distribution, power differences, economic distribution, and organizing process contributions are derived from attributes of the self-definition/control mix characterizing each organization form. Micro process differences related to motivation, leadership, job design, and compensation are based on a cross-cultural analysis of empirical counterparts. Suggestions regarding the identification of American organizational collectivism are offered, and normative paths of change among the four forms of organization are outlined. It is suggested that, in failing to address collectivism, American theorists of organization, organizational behavior, and organizational development have artificially limited their scope of inquiry. The dissertation serves as a first step in reducing this limitation.","Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-15T23:30:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 8218579.pdf: 10060831 bytes, checksum: c68267b2a2225b25957853f467ee4fd8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 1982","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 70606 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","268 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1982."],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/70440","(UMI)AAI8218579"],"dc:subject":["Business Administration, General"],"dc:title":["The Organizing Dilemma: Individualism, Collectivism, and the Control of Organization"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Business Administration"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:02Z"}