Organising by linking decisions and actions

Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)


Discourse Analysis Company Medium Business Unit Communication Manager Company Member 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


This Chapter focuses on analysing Strand 2 of the revised framework, i.e. aspects of ‘organising by linking decisions and actions’. Apart from relating Strand 2 back to the overall framework for analysis, Table 10 also lists the concrete research questions for analysing this Strand of interrelations between strategy and communication processes.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 31.
    See e.g. Münch, U. and K. Meerwaldt (2002). Arguments pro federalism are: Democratic values can be realized in a federal structure due to its higher level of participation than in Unitarianism. Due to subsidiarity each individual has the opportunity to participate. Federalism creates a climate for innovation and experimentation in the decentralised units. A federal system minimizes concentration of power — horizontally (different functions) and vertically (e.g. regions vs. corporate). Federalism creates competition among participants. Due to decentralisation and the broad base of managers there are hardly any management problems to be solved. A high level of continuity and reliability is reached, leading to a high level of stability of the system. Federalism strengthens democracy by promoting autonomy etc. A federal structure promotes intellectual, cultural and social diversity. Because power is decentralised, there is also a variety of media and information sources. Arguments against federalism are: Equality is not ensured among the different decentralised units. Decision-making can be seen as difficult. Some see changes hard to implement because of the shared agreement which has to be achieved before. Activities of the top decision makers are not necessarily transparent because individuals do not know the exact processes of decision-making. Responsibilities are not always clear. Costs for coordinating the activities can be high. Infrastructures which are created by one decentralised unit can be used by the others as well (spill-over-effect) which can keep other units from investing as well.Google Scholar
  2. 32.
    A further and more in-depth discussion of federalism as a principle of organising companies leads into political theory and breaks the limits of this study. For readers who want to gain a more in-depth insight into implications of federalism for management theory and practice it is referred back to Handy (1992; 2002).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2007

Personalised recommendations