IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jomstd/v27y1990i3p245-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Professionals And Innovation: Structural‐Functional Versus Radical‐Structural Perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Drazin

Abstract

The study of the role of professionals in the organizational innovation process has been dominated by a Structural‐Functional perspective. The assumptions associated with this perspective are examined, critiqued, and shown to have led to research findings marked by equivocality and instability. An alternative approach, based on Radical‐Structural principles is developed, and suggestions for implementing this approach in future research are offered.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Drazin, 1990. "Professionals And Innovation: Structural‐Functional Versus Radical‐Structural Perspectives," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 245-263, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:27:y:1990:i:3:p:245-263
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1990.tb00246.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1990.tb00246.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1990.tb00246.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Khuong, Le-Nguyen & Harindranath, G. & Dyerson, Romano, 2014. "Understanding knowledge management software-organisation misalignments from an institutional perspective: A case study of a global IT-management consultancy firm," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 226-247.
    2. Peter Armstrong, 1993. "Professional Knowledge and Social Mobility: Postwar Changes in the Knowledge-Base of Management Accounting," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 7(1), pages 1-21, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:27:y:1990:i:3:p:245-263. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.