Adhocracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Adhocracy is a type of organization being an opposite of bureaucracy. The term was first popularized in 1970 by Alvin Toffler^[1], and has since become often used in the theory of management of organizations (particularly online organizations), further developed by academics such as Henry Mintzberg.

1 Etymology
2 Specifics
3 Use in fiction
4 See also
5 References
6 External links

[edit] Etymology

The word is a portmanteau of ad hoc, meaning 'for purpose', and the suffix -cracy, from cratein, meaning 'to govern'^[1], and is thus a heteroclite. The term was first popularized in 1970 by Alvin Toffler^[1] and has since become often used in the theory of management of organizations, further developed by academics such as Henry Mintzberg.

[edit] Specifics

Robert H. Waterman, Jr. defined adhocracy as "any form of organization that cuts across normal bureaucratic lines to capture opportunities, solve problems, and get results."[1] For Henry Mintzberg, an adhocracy is a complex and dynamic organizational form.^[2] It is different from bureaucracy; like Toffler, Mintzberg considers bureaucracy a thing of the past, and adhocracy one of the future.^[1] Adhocracy is very good at problem solving and innovations^[1] and thrives in a changing environment^[2]. It requires sophisticated and often automated technical systems to develop and thrive.^[1]

Characteristics of an adhocracy:

highly organic structure^[2]
little formalization of behavior^[2]^[1]
job specialization based on formal training[2]
a tendency to group the specialists in functional units for housekeeping purposes but to deploy them in small, market-based project teams to do their work^[2]
a reliance on liaison devices to encourage mutual adjustment, the key coordinating mechanism, within and between these teams^[2]^[3]
low standarization of procedures, because they stifle innovation^[1]
roles not clearly defined^[1]
selective decentralization^[1]
work organization rests on specialized teams^[1]
power-shifts to specialized teams
horizontal job specialization^[3]
high cost of communication^[3]
culture based on democractic and non-bureaucratic work ^[3]

All members of an organization have the authority to make decisions and to take actions affecting the future of the organization. There is an absence of hierarchy.

Alvin Toffler noted in his book Future Shock that adhocracies will get more common and are likely to replace bureaucracy in the near future. He also wrote that they will most often come in form of a temporary structure, formed to resolve a given problem and dissolved afterwards. An example are cross-department task forces.

Downsides of adhocracies can include "half-baked actions", personnel problems stemming from organization's temporary nature, extremism in suggested or undertaken actions, and threats to democracy and legality rising from adhocracy's often low-key profile.^[3] To address those problems, researches in adhocracy suggest a model merging adhocracy and bureaucracy, the bureau-adhocracy.^[3]