Running Head: Organismic Organization

Morgans Metaphor: An Analysis of an Organismic Organization

Jessica Napoli-McNally
SUNY IT NUR 503-35W

ORGANISMIC ORGANIZATION

Morgans Metaphor: An Analysis of an Organismic Organization

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a metaphor is a term or word that is used
to describe or symbolize something else. It is using a familiar item or phrase to show how similar
the two things are (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2014). One example is the phrase drowning in
homework. An individual cannot literally drown in homework, but the phrase gives the idea that
the individual is overwhelmed by the amount of homework they have. Metaphors can be very
useful to describe, symbolize and view things in new ways.
Gareth Morgan developed Organizational Metaphors as a way to view organizations and
their complex nature (Morgan, 1986). The purpose of the metaphors is to demonstrate and
understand the way organizations behave, interact, function, and progress with the intention of
promoting change (McCourt, 1997). Metaphors are used to provide a common way of
understanding the point of view. Essentially, it puts the perspective from the same angle for all
looking at it. Morgan theorized that metaphors were necessary in all scientific thinking and that
in thinking of organizations metaphorically, new views of organizations could be found. This
new organizational insight would benefit the organization to function with more creativity. The
(McCourt, 1997).
Morgan suggested that there were eight different perspectives in which to view
organizations. The first metaphor was a machine view. In a machine view, the organization was
seen as a rigid structured entity and are driven by efficiency. This can be viewed in factory or
assembly line settings. The goal of the organization is to produce a product. Each individual is
assigned a task that is performed repetitively and each persons product will eventually create the
whole product (Morgan, 1986).

ORGANISMIC ORGANIZATION

Organismic view of organizations looks at organizations as a living thing. Like all living
things, the organization is focused on survival. The organization not only depends on inflow and
outflow of resources to survive, but also will evolve to maintain survival. The organismic
metaphor demonstrates how organizations can survive or cease to exist (Morgan, 1986). This
theory will be explored more in depth later in this writing.
The third metaphor Morgan described was that of organizations being information
processors. This view looks at the input of information into the system and how the organization
will adapt itself after it has processed that information. This is sometimes referred to as the brain
metaphor, since it is concerned with the uptake of information, learning, and problem solving
(Gazendam, 1993). These organizations are also seen as self-regulating. The intake of
information allows the organization to process this information and adapt accordingly (Morgan,
1986).
Organizations as cultures is the fourth metaphor described by Gareth Morgan (Morgan,
1986). Seeing an organization as a culture in itself entails understanding shared thoughts. The
organization is driven by the perpetuation of these shared thoughts that give the organization its
meaning (Morgan, 1986). These organizations are based on social construction of those with a
like goal (Gazendam, 1993). A religious organization is an example of this type of organization.
The group has a shared sense of morality or belief that gives their group meaning.
When organizations are viewed metaphorically as political organizations, there is a strong
foundation of authority and power relationships. Those with the power dominate. Those who do
not agree may leave the organization. This authoritarian type of organization can cause conflict
among its members or groups of members. This conflict, in turn, can lead to substantial
competition among the members of the organization (Morgan, 1986). Ideally the organizational

ORGANISMIC ORGANIZATION

parts would cooperate, however as individuals we are not always able to do that and political
organizations become a power struggle (Gazendam, 1993).
The metaphor of organizations as instruments of domination can be seen as similar to
the political organization metaphor, but there are some real differences between the two
metaphors. When an organization is viewed as an instrument of domination it has no
consideration for the well-being of others. The only goal of the organization is to advance itself
(Morgan, 1986). The power within the organization is very unbalanced (Gazendam, 1993). This
is often seen in capitalism corporations. For example, the health benefits of employees may be
cut to reduce spending, with no concern as to how it will affect the employees expenses or
health. Its only concern is to grow, at any cost.
The seventh organizational metaphor described by Morgan is that of an organization
being a psychic prison. In this metaphor, the group is viewed as having a shared thought process.
The members are not aware of their own thought process and how it conforms to the group
(Gazendam, 1993). These organizations have difficulty adapting or changing since it would
require the entire shared thought to change. Opposing thoughts are seen as a challenge to the
well-being of the group, rather than an idea that may be beneficial to the group (Morgan, 1986).
Tasks within the organization are done because that is how they have always been done, not
because they necessarily benefit the organization.
The next metaphor describes organizations as being able to change and adapt. These are
referred to as transformative organizations (Morgan, 1986). These organizations are able to adapt
easily to the environment around them (Gazendam, 1993). The main strength sighted in this type
of organization is the ability to use it retrospectively on an organization (Morgan, 1986). Change

ORGANISMIC ORGANIZATION

is difficult at times. Evaluating the organizations ability to change and adapt after the fact, can
provide insight on future decisions.
Organizational metaphors are useful in nursing and organizational behavior to
demonstrate a common point of view. Organizations and the nursing field are complex systems.
As a complex system it can have boundaries that are not well defined (Plsek & Greenhalgh,
2001). These metaphors help to identify and define these boundaries in a language that is
commonly understood.

ORGANISMIC ORGANIZATION

References
Gazendam, H. W. M. (1993). Conceptual analysis and specification of Morgans metaphors
using the CAST method. Retrieved on October 5, 2014 from
http://www.bdk.rug.nl/medewerkers/h.w.m.gazendam/WebBDK/Documents/1993/Conce
ptual%20analysis%20and%20specification%20of%20Morgan.pdf
McCourt, W. (1997) Discussion Note: using metaphors to understand and to change
Organizations: A critique of Gareth Morgans Approach. Organization studies. 18(3) 511522.
Metaphor. (2014, January 1). Retrieved October 3, 2014 from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metaphor
Morgan, G. Images of Organization, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc, 1986
Plsek, P. E., & Greenhalgh, T. (2001) The challenge of complexity in health care. British
medical journal. 323, 625-628.

Bradley, E., McSherry, W., & McSherry, R. (2010). The dissemination of healthcare research:
Utilizing joint posts. Nursing Times 106(44).
Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2012). Traumatic Injury. Retrieved on April 25, 2014

ORGANISMIC ORGANIZATION

from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/programs/ti/
Current Nursing, (2013). Health Belief Model. Retrieved on February 22, 2014 from
http://currentnursing.com/nursing_theory/health_belief_model.html
Losanoff, J. E., Konrad, A., Sauter, E. R. (2008). Breast cancer after severe burn injury:
Coincidence or consequence? The Breast Journal 14(1), 87-89.
Maskarinec, G., Cotay, C. C., Tatsumura, Y., Shumay, D., & Kakai, H. (2001). Perceived cancer
causes. Cancer Practice, 9(4), 183-190.
Panjari, M., Davis, S., Fradkin, P., & Bell, R. (2012). Breast cancer survivors beliefs about the
causes of breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology 21: 724-729.
Piedmonte, E. D., Lazos. J. P., & Brunotto, M. (2010). Relationship between chronic trauma of
the oral mucosa, oral potentially malignant disorders and oral cancer. Journal of Oral
Pathology & Medicine 39(7). Doi: 11.111/j.1600-0714.2010.000901.x
Ribgy, J., Morris, J. Lavell, J., Stewart, M., & Gatrell, A. (2002). Can physical trauma cause
breast cancer? European Journal of Cancer Prevention 11(3), 307-311.
Shiffman, M. (2011). Trauma & cancer: case reports & literature review. The Forensic Examiner
Publisher 20(1).
Wood, M., & Ross-Kerr, J. (2011). Basic steps in planning nursing research: from question to
proposal, (7th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.