In recent years theorists have presented models of individual motivation based upon adaptations of Wiener's 1948 cybernetic model. However, in comparison with this and other foundation models on which we might build, the Davis model is less redundant, more complete, and more attuned to human behavior. In recent years, theorists have presented models of individual motivation based upon adaptations of Wiener's 1948 cybernetic model.(1,2) They propose modifying Wiener's mechanistic, negative-feedback-loop system - comprising a referent standard (or goal), a sensor for input, a comparator to detect deviations from standard (or need for corrective action), and an output function that effects corrective action - to reflect how individuals perceive and react to discrepancies between desired and current states. Within this context, they are conducting research about how different variables - such as high versus low self-focus -moderate the relationship between individual cognitions and such factors as job satisfaction and organizational commitment.(3) And the suggestion has been made that “control theory in general could be modified and employed at other levels of analysis (eg., work groups, organizations) because goals and feedback are also relevant at those levels”. Actually, we already have in place the foundations of a viable control theory for organizations. It predates Wiener, yet a review of its development provides insights and issues that are quite relevant to current research questions. Therefore, the remainder of this paper will trace the long-term, often-disorganized process through which this “other control model” evolved.
Tijdschrift beschrijving