Small http://sgr.sagepub.

com/
Group Research

Organizational Alienation and Job Climate: A Comparative Study

of Structural Conditions and Psychological Adjustment
Andrew Kakabadse
Small Group Research 1986 17: 458
DOI: 10.1177/104649648601700406

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://sgr.sagepub.com/content/17/4/458

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Small Group Research can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://sgr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://sgr.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://sgr.sagepub.com/content/17/4/458.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Nov 1, 1986

What is This?

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 This study investigated the relationship between aspects of organizational structure
and alienation as experienced by personnel employed in nine social services
organizations. Interview schedules were used for three distinct groups in these
organizations: those making executive decisions, those making supervisory as-
sessments, and those concerned primarily with client interaction, for a total of 603
respondents. The best predictions of organizational structure were aspects of
and formalization, which related strongly to the dimensions of
centralization
powerlessness and self-estrangement.

ORGANIZATIONAL ALIENATION
AND JOB CLIMATE
A Comparative Study
of Structural Conditions
and Psychological Adjustment

ANDREW KAKABADSE
Cranfield School of Management

Although alienation is a popular theme of the intellectual

tradition, many writers (Clarke, 1959; Payne, 1974; Miller,
1975) have recognized the enigmatic nature of alienation
studies. Ambiguity of meaning is inevitable as the concept has
incorporated philosophical, psychological, sociological, and
political orientations, such as apathy (Kenniston, 1960),
authoritarianism (Adorno, 1950), cynicism (Merton, 1947),
hoboism (Grodzins,1956), political apathy (Rosenberg, 1951),
regression and suicide (Roberts and Rokeach, 1956), age
(Martin, Bengston, and Acock, 1974), attempts at identifying
categories of alienation (Fischer, 1976), and assertions that
alienation is a perspective rather than a concept (Nisbet, 1953).
Yet few writers have realized that alienation stands at the
confluence between the broader social/ structural conditions
SMALL GROUP BEHAVIOR, Vol 17 No 4, November 1986 458-4711
@1987 Sage Publications, Inc

458

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 459

and psychological adjustment (Kohn, 1976). The structural

side is epitomized by two social analysts-Marx, for whom
division of labor leads to society being alienated from Man,
and Durkheim (Merton,1957), whereby Man is alienated from
society in despair and isolation (anomie). On the psychological
side, despite extensive research and literature surveys (Seeman,
1967; Miller, 1967) on typologies experienced and expressed by
respondents, little empirical analysis has been undertaken into
specific social contexts that produce certain mental states
(Aiken and Hage, 1966), and even fewer on the adjustment
process when relating the mental states to the particular social
context (job climate).

BASIC VARIABLES

Our concern is to study the relationship between three

dimensions of organization structure, centralization, formal-
ization, and complexity, and two dimensions of alienation,
powerlessness and self-estrangement. Powerlessness is com-
posed of two factors-index of job autonomy and index of
career fulfillment. Similarly, self-estrangement is made up of
index of questioning authority and index of interpersonal
aggression.
Powerlessness is defined as the expectancy or probability
held by the individual that his own behavior cannot determine
the occurrence of the outcomes, or reinforcements, he seeks
(Seeman, 1959). Hence, alienation from primary work role
reflects a feeling of lack of job autonomy in the discharge of
duties and daily tasks (Aiken and Hage, 1966). The index of
career fulfillment is characterized by a feeling of disappoint-
ment with career and professional development and an inability
to fulfill the demands of professional norms (Tudor, 1972).
These two interpretations originate from the Marxian view
that means of decision making and personal development at
work are expropriated from the process of production (Botto-
more and Rubel, 1963).

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

460

Self-estrangement is taken to mean the degree of dependence

of the given behavior upon anticipated future rewards, namely,
rewards that lie outside the activity itself (Seeman, 1959).
Therefore, we are concerned with a mode of experience in
which the person experiences himself as alien; he has become,
one might say, estranged from himself (Fromm, 1955). The
index of questioning authority (Payne and Phesey, 1971) is
simply taken to mean the extent to which one questions roles
and decisions made by persons in the organizational hierarchy.
The index of interpersonal aggression (Payne and Phesey,
1971 ) indicates the degree of lack of cohesion among colleagues
in the hierarchy.
The reason these two dimensions of alienation were chosen
is that social work is considered to involve the discharge of
nonuniform tasks. Consequently, it is expected for a social
worker to behave differently with different clients, adjusting to
the particular needs of each individual, hence being able to
display a substantial degree of job autonomy. Further, in order
to maintain reasonable standards of service over substantial
periods of time, it is presumed that the worker should
experience some form of personal fulfillment in daily duties or
longer-term career. If the expectations of job autonomy and
career fulfillment are frustrated, the individual is said to be

powerless in fulfilling the primary work role. By attempting to

alter the situation through questioning authority patterns and
by being checked in doing so, what alternative patterns of
behavior develop? An individual is self-estranged when unable
to question authority and is interpersonally aggressive with
coworkers, as he or she loses the basic orientation to rewards
intrinsic to the activity itself.
Centralization is a measure of how power is distributed
among social positions (Hage and Aiken, 1967a). We take two
features of centralization; first, the degree to which occupants
of various positions participate in decisions about the al-
location of resources and organizational policies (index of
participation in decision making); second, the extent to which

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 461

members are assigned tasks and then provided with the

freedom to implement them without interruption from supe-
riors (index of hierarchy of authority).
By formalization, we mean the degree to which tasks and
work processes are uniform and the diversity allowed from this
constancy. The dimension is measured by four factors: the
index ofjob codification representing the extent to whichjobs
are specified, index of rule observation measuring whether or
not rules are employed (an aspect of closeness of supervision),
the presence of rule manuals, and the presence of job de-
scriptions (Hage and Aiken, 1967a).
Complexity is taken to be an aspect of specialization, with
the emphasis on expertise gained by training as opposed to the
division and systematization of daily routine tasks (Durkheim,
1933). This dimension is represented by four alternate empirical
indicators: the length of training by each occupational special-
ization, the degree of extraorganizational professional activity
associated with each occupation, the degree of trade union
activity associated with each occupation, and the number of
occupational specialties in the organization (Hage and Aiken,
1967b).

METHODOLOGY

Data were collected from nine social services organizations

located in northwest England. All organizations employed a
minimum of 800 employees, providing state-regulated services
of psychiatric care, child placement, child care, care for the
elderly, institutional care, and emergency services; some
offered additional community and welfare development ser-
vices. Up-to-date staff lists were obtained for sampling pur-
poses, with each organization subdivided (stratified random
sample) on a key dimension-managerial levels. Job occupants
within these levels were selected on the following criteria:

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

462

(1) all executives and department heads

(2) all supervisory personnel who held specialist posts
(3) organizations of fewer than 20 professionals (those concerned
with the discharge of social work duties), including supervisors
not in the above category-one-half being selected randomly
(4) one-third selected randomly in departments of more than 20
professionals

Nonprofessionals in the sense of administrative and mainte-

nance personnel were not interviewed as they were less likely to
be involved in the establishment of organizational goals and
policies. The sampling procedure attempted to ensure that
everyone in a professional role (whether managerial or social
work) was represented. The two dimensions of alienation were
computed on the basis of responses to the items in Figure 1.
Responses to the index of job autonomy (see Figure 2)
varied from 1 (always) to 5 (never), with the scoring reversed
for question 1. Index of career fulfillment varied from 1 (very
dissatisfied) to 4 (very satisfied).
Responses to both indices could vary from 1 (definitely
false) to 4 (definitely true). The items representing the di-
mensions of centralization, formalization, and complexity are
not reported here, as they have been adequately covered
(Aiken and Hage, 1966; Hage and Aiken, 1967a, 1967b, 1969,
Hage et al., 1971). All the items were selected on the basis of a
two-way analysis of variance with covariates and factor-
analysis solution (varimax and oblique rotation) from a 101-
item battery.

FINDINGS

Litwak (1961) suggested that organizations performing pri-

marily nonuniform tasks are more likely to be decentralized.
In accordance with Table 1, the nine organizations are skewed
toward the dimensions of centralization and formalization,
notably the three indices of hierarchy of authority, job codifi-

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 463

Figure 1: Powerlessness

cation, and rule observation. Hierarchy of authority is a better

predictor of distribution of power than participation in deci-
sion making. It correlates highly and positively with job codifi-
cation (.2333) and rule observation (.2601). Consequently,
these organizations will pay greater heed to chains of command

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

464

Figure 2 : Self-Estrangement

and closeness of supervision (suggested by the strong associa-

tion of rule observation and hierarchy of authority). Closeness
of supervision can be interpreted in two ways:

(1) Supervisors are making most of the work decisions to the

extent that they are defining rules for their subordinates.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 -

M
0
<0
11
Z
o
C
’2
R
N_
E
cc
cm
0
(D
0
5
L
N
*!5
°6
8
d

Z
n
O
’~-out
’fL
CL0
w

m a
Q
S0)
m
N

g
S
0
£
o

o
d
b
8
C

j
E

S#
m
i:L

465

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

466

(2) Supervisors are overseeing subordinates closely, but over rules

predefined by higher management.
The arguments that supervisors are highly influential in
making work decisions and defining rules for subordinates are
strengthened by the weak and negative associations existing
between hierarchy of authority and the presence of a rules
manual, job descriptions, educational attainment, and pro-
fessional activities. These results imply that the way the
hierarchy is established has little to do with organizational
statement of rules and procedures, job descriptions, or training
and professional interests, but more with strong supervisory
direction.
A number of studies suggest that centralized organizations
are likely to have high rates of work alienation. Blauner (1964)
found that workers express feeling of powerlessness in such
industries as textiles and automobiles, where they have little
control over the conditions of employment. Pearlin (1962)
highlighted feelings of alienation among nurses if the authority
structure was too rigid and impersonal.
Table 2 shows strong negative (r) correlations between the
index of job autonomy and hierarchy of authority (r = -.2921)
and the four indices of formalization Organizations that rely
on hierarchical and formalized arrangements are likely to be
characterized by a feeling of lack of job autonomy. Inter-
estingly, the relationship between professional activities and
job autonomy is strong and positive (r = -.1306), implying that
those undertaking extradepartmental activities, such as at-
tending conferences or writing papers, are likely to experience
job autonomy. Yet this does not fulfill the primary work role of
social work.
Using the beta weights as a check (to determine the net effect
of independent variables), the situation remains largely un-
changed, except for the presence of job descriptions. Here the
index is nonsignificant yet negatively oriented, implying that
alienation from one primary work role is experienced in

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 O
fi
C-
c-
0 M
’~! 0
mK6>
511
<C-
os-sC
~1å
3 N
Cm V
m
CO
Q) Q) m
£ I
m&eth;; ell -
N ? ,&dquo;

W ~8
J
<S 0
P ~0 =_
S~
W n
-0E~ ev
Q_7 H
O m 0
-S~
b- .. -

oev
U i’
cv
p

:!: a)
oN
L I

~I- Z£

0
..
a

467

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

468

relation to organizational structures, but with a positive orien-

tation to extraorganizational professional activities.
A negative correlation (r = -.1994) between index of career
fulfillment and hierarchy of authority maintains the trend of
dissatisfaction with hierarchical arrangements. An equally
strong, negative relationship between career fulfillment and
rule observation is indicated, but is nonsignificant with beta
weights. On the other hand, career fulfillment is strongly
related to the presence ofjob descriptions (maintained in
strength and direction under beta weights). This is understand-
able, for although the job description reduces the amount of
job autonomy, it does identify the authority relationships in
the organization. It may be that any alienation effect is not so
much the identification of a person’s roles in the accountability
line, but rather the enforcement and interpretation of rules, in
this case, at the supervisory level. Rigidity of structure may not
on its own lead to alienative effect, but rather the way rules are

interpreted and enforced within structures.

The index of questioning authority relates negatively to
hierarchy of authority (r = -.1427), rule observation (r =
-.1173), and occupational specialization (r = -.1088). Under
the beta weights, the significance of rule observation is
reduced, but the other relationships are maintained. The more
established the hierarchy of authority, the less the degree of
questioning authority. Further, with occupational specialism,
the greater the degree of specialism, the less the questioning of
authority. Hage and Aiken (1969) assumed that occupational
specialization and professional training are inherently linked
in organizations performing nonuniform tasks. Perhaps the
determining factor is the hierarchic orientation of power
relations and not tasks, for the results indicate the process of
formalization may involve increasing specialism but less need
for job occupants with advanced training.
The index of interpersonal aggression correlates positively
with hierarchy of authority (r = -.1964), rule observation (r =
.2879), and educational attainment (r =.1348), with no change
in directions or significance under the beta weights. The more

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 469

established the hierarchy and the greater the degree of rule

observation, the greater the degree of interpersonal aggression.
This adds to conclusions previously reached that, with few
people participating in decision making, there is likely to be
little felt commitment for nonparticipants, hence a greater
need for enforcement of rules. Therefore, questioning of
authority is likely to decrease while interpersonal aggression
increases. The strong link between educational attainment and
interpersonal aggression suggests that those most active, in
interpersonal behavior terms, are ones with professional
training, but who are accepting or maintaining the alienative
norms that these organizations have established.

CONCLUSION

Centralized and formalized organizational structures are

characterized by feelings of powerlessness and self-estrange-
ment. Specifically, an inability to participate in decision
making concerning organizational policies and the assignment
of individual tasks leads to dissatisfaction with one’s job and
career and an inability to communicate adequately with one’s

colleagues. Kornhauser (1962) concluded that most conflicts

between scientists or engineers and their employing organi-
zation stem from the basic organizational dilemma of auton-
omy versus integration. One has to allow for sufficient freedom
for professional needs, yet orient them to the overall goals of
the organization. This is too simple a dichotomy to accept.
Kakabadse (1975) has shown that social work involves inter-
vention in a process of social change and that people involved
in this process find it difficult to be precise about their work.
This may be due to

(1) an unawareness of all the processes their work involves

(2) the fact that processes of change may be different with each
new situation and may require constant initiative from the
individual

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

470

Either way, it seems that discussion with both colleagues and

superiors is necessary to clarify further activity with particular
clients or groups. The results indicate that discussion with
superiors is in a downward direction in terms of role inter-
pretation and enforcement, and interaction with colleagues is
on an aggressive, possibly competitive, basis. Consequently one
must ask: How do employees adjust over a working life to such
organizational norms?

REFERENCES

ADORNO, T. W. (1950) The Authoritarian Personality. New York. Harper &

Brothers.
AIKEN, M. and J. HAGE (1966) "Organization alienation: a comparative analysis."
Amer. Soc. Rev. 31: 417-507.
BLAUNER, R. (1964) Alienation and Freedom. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
BOTTOMORE, T. B. and M. RUBEL [eds.] (1963) Karl Marx: Selected Writings in
Sociological and Social Philosophy. London: Penguin.
CLARKE, J. P. (1959) "Measuring alientation within a social system." Amer. Soc.
Rev. 24: 849-852.
DURKHEIM, E. (1933) The Division of Labor in Society. New York:Macmillan.
FISCHER, C. S. (1976) "Alienation: trying to bridge the chasm." British J. of
Sociology 27: 35-49.
FROMM, E. (1955) The Sane Society. New York: Rinehart.
GRODZINS, M. (1956) The Loyal and the Disloyal. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
HAGE, J. and M. AIKEN (1967a) "The relationship of centralization to other
structural properties." Admin. Sci. Q. 12: 72-92.
HAGE, J. and M. AIKEN (1967b) "Program change and organizational properties."
Amer. J. of Sociology 72: 503-519.
HAGE, J. and M. AIKEN (1969) "Routine technology, social structure and organi-
zational goals." Admin. Sci. Q. 14: 366-375.
HAGE, J., M. AIKEN, and C. G. MARRETT (1971) "Organization structure and
communications." Amer. Soc. Rev. 36: 860-871.
KAKABADSE, A. P. (1975) "Analysis of social work, health and social service."
Health & Social Service. J. (May): 15-16.
KENNISTON, K. (1960) "Alienation and the decline of utopia." Amer. Scholar 29:
163-165.
KOHN, M. L. (1976) "Occupational structure and alienation." Amer. J. of Sociology
82: 111-130.
KORNHAUSER, W. (1962) Scientists in Industry: Conflict and Accommodation.
Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014

 471

LITWAK, E. (1961) "Models of bureaucracy which permit conflict." Amer. J. of

Sociology 67: 177-184.
MARTIN, W. C., V. L. BENGSTON, and A. C. ACOCK (1974) "Alienation and age:
a context specific approach." Social Forces 53: 226-274.

MERTON, R. (1947) Mass Persuasion. New York: Harper & Brothers.

MERTON, R. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
MILLER, G. (1967) "Professionals in bureaucracy: alientation among Industrial
scientists and engineers." Amer. Soc. Rev. 32: 755-767.
MILLER, R. (1975) "Isolation in organizations: alienation from authority, control
and expensive relations." Admin. Sci. Q. 20: 260-271.
NISBET, R. A. (1953) The Quest and Community. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
PAYNE, D. E. (1974) "Alienation: An organizational-social comparison." Social
Forces 53: 274-282.
PAYNE, R. L. and D. C. PHESEY (1971) "G. G. Stern’s organizational climate index:
a reconceptualization and application to business organizations." Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance 6: 77-98.
PEARLIN, L. J. (1962) "Alienation from work: a study of nursing personnel." Amer.
Soc. Rev. 27: 314-326.
ROBERTS, A. M. and M. ROKEACH (1956) "Anomie, authoritarianism and
prejudice: a replication." Amer. J. of Sociology 61: 355-358.
ROSENBERG, M. (1951) "The meaning of politics in a mass society. "Public Opinion
Q. 15: 5-15.
SEEMAN, M. (1959) "On the meaning of alienation." Amer. Soc. Rev. 24: 783-791.
SEEMAN, M. (1967) "On the personal consequences of alienation in work." Amer.
Soc. Rev. 32: 273-285.
TUDOR, B. (1972) "A specification of relationships between job complexity and
powerlessness." Amer. Soc. Rev. 37: 596-604.

Andrew Kakabadse received his M. A. in organization behavior from Brunel

University and his Ph.D. In organization behavior from Manchester Univer-
sity, UK. Currently, he is Professor of Management Development and Head of
the Human Resources Group at Cranfield School of Management. He is
consultant to a number of multinationals and to governments, and his research
interests include effective top executive performance, power and politics, and
consultancy skills.

Downloaded from sgr.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on November 7, 2014