3.1 Limitations of Organization Theory

While organization theory helps to understand the movement, it also falls short to perceive certain aspects of it. I perceive the shortcoming to stem from an underlying intent of organization theory to concentrate on the increase of effectivity and efficiency of organizations, which does not always apply to the movement and its parts.

It appears, for example, that Vloeberghs judges critical perspectives on Human Resource Management solely on their contribution to efficiency and effectivity (Vloeberghs 1997: 99-117, Kalab 1999), and not also on their philosophic and human aspects, of which at least the latter obviously contribute to the interaction of the movement and its parts. In short, it appears a religious movement cannot be understood solely from a utilisation point of view. Even highly decentralised and fragmented organizations have a central authority that is responsible for overall results (Vloeberghs 1997: 269-275). The movement lacks such explicit structural hierarchy and output control. Even Martin, who treats „Cultures in Organizations” (Martin 1992), proposes to approach organizations not only from a „Multiperspective Approach” (Martin 1992: 174), but to move beyond.

In the following section I will shortly consider limitations of some organization theories, Mintzberg's „Missionary Configuration” (Mintzberg 1983) and network approaches. In section 3.2 I will then present a few examples of approaches that move beyond organization theory.