Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGates, Robert Valentineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-14T20:19:37Z
dc.date.available2014-03-14T20:19:37Z
dc.date.issued2003-11-18en_US
dc.identifier.otheretd-12022003-195802en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/29872
dc.description.abstractAs part of an on-going process of centralizing control of government science and technology (S&T) after World War II, in 1966 the Navy went through a major reorganization that was intended to centralize the strategic management of the Navy laboratory system. This centralization was to be accomplished by placing the major Navy research and development activities in a single systems command - the Naval Material Command - and establishing the position of Director of Navy Laboratories. Organizational studies and reorganizations continued for the next 25 years until the Naval Material Command and the Director of Navy Laboratories were disestablished in 1985 and 1991, respectively. This dissertation is, in part, an historical study of the Navy from 1946 to 1966 that focuses on the bureaus and laboratories. It summarizes the organizational changes related to strategic management and planning of science and technology. The 1966 reorganization was a critical event because it created the first formal Navy laboratory system. It is proposed that the 1966 reorganization was not successful in centralizing the strategic management of the Navy laboratory system. Classical organization theory offers an explanation of this failure. What can complexity theory add? The overarching contribution is in recognizing that a "Navy Laboratory System" existed before one was formally established in 1966. This argument is developed by considering two specific aspects of complexity theory. First, there is the notion that strategic management of the laboratory system resulted from the complex interactions of the smaller units that comprise the system (rather than the result of organization and process choices by senior leadership). Second, there is the theory that an organization will exhibit different behaviors at different times or in different parts of the organization at the same time. This translates into the idea that at particular times and places, the formal structure was dominant in strategic management, but at other times the "emergent" organization was dominant. In fact, if power law theory is applicable, then the periods of stability (where the formal structure was dominant) ought to be more prevalent than the turbulent periods where the emergent organization was dominant in strategic management. This case is made by describing agent-based models of the Navy laboratory system at two points in time and using them to identify the expected performance characteristics of the system. Historical and organizational artifacts are then used to make the case that the postulated system existed.en_US
dc.publisherVirginia Techen_US
dc.relation.haspartGatesDiss112003C.pdfen_US
dc.rightsI hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to Virginia Tech or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report.en_US
dc.subjectNavy Laboratoriesen_US
dc.subjectStrategic Managementen_US
dc.subjectComplexity Theoryen_US
dc.titleStrategic Management of Navy R&D Laboratories: An Application of Complexity Theory; Director of Navy Laboratories Case Studyen_US
dc.typeDissertationen_US
dc.contributor.departmentPublic Administration and Public Affairsen_US
dc.description.degreePh. D.en_US
thesis.degree.namePh. D.en_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen_US
thesis.degree.disciplinePublic Administration and Public Affairsen_US
dc.contributor.committeechairKronenberg, Philip S.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberColvard, James E.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberWolf, James F.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberBadawy, Michael K.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberHazell, J. Ericen_US
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-12022003-195802/en_US
dc.date.sdate2003-12-02en_US
dc.date.rdate2003-12-08
dc.date.adate2003-12-08en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record