Special Interest Society by Hudson James R.;Hudson Patricia A.;

Author:Hudson, James R.;Hudson, Patricia A.;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: undefined
Publisher: Lexington Books
Published: 2012-08-15T00:00:00+00:00

Summary

The claims for different kinds of legitimacy are linked to membership in several ways. As has been noted, the size of the potential membership and the size of the actual membership play a role in legitimacy claims. No simple measurement exists to determine what ratio is necessary between these two for an organization to claim and achieve legitimacy for a domain. Both the numerator and the denominator are constantly changing in both directions.

Gaining and sustaining legitimacy of any type is a continuous process. MBOs face constant changes in society that challenge their legitimacy. Some respond better than others because they are simply less rigid and willing to abandon outmoded traditions. Those that are less adaptive risk losing status in the domain as their moral and cognitive legitimacy wanes.

The axiom that every organization needs some level of legitimacy to operate in our society does not preclude some rogue organizations’ ability to slip past the gatekeepers and find a niche at the margins. Legitimacy is a necessary attribute for any organization to operate effectively in our society. It provides a platform on which to develop orderly exchanges among other individuals and organizations within its environment. The concept of legitimacy itself is open to a variety of meanings and interpretations. The virtue of Suchman’s and Scott’s approach to identifying three types of legitimacy is their adaptability to understanding how membership-based organizations achieved each type.

The strategy used most often by many MBOs to achieve pragmatic legitimacy was to build upon the reputations of the founders. These individuals possessed a degree of legitimacy that was used to attract others in the discipline or field. Their reputations gave credibility that such an organization was needed, feasible, and possible.

The founders quickly put in place a structure that would provide a base for legal and pragmatic legitimacy. The design of that structure was defined in the bylaws. It identified the need for an ongoing cadre of association members willing to contribute their time and talent to establish the kind of governance and management systems that would address the most mundane to the most critical tasks.

A key provision in the bylaws clearly defined the rights and privileges as well as the duties and obligations afforded members. But the level and degree of access was not standardized as some organizations created distinctions for those members who were given full participation in the community versus those who were not.

Others strategies were employed to establish other types of legitimacy. The eligibility requirements for membership that were stipulated in their documents were initially based on a number of shared characteristics of the founders. These included skills, competence, and reputation in the organization’s key domain. In some cases race, gender, and social class were explicit or implicit. In the last half century these social elements became a challenge to some claims of legitimacy the organizations were making. Those who were continuously excluded from entry most often responded by creating a separate organization. Others made it clear that they were appealing to very specialized professional or social groups.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.