Evolutionary Pathways of Management Systems: A Qualitative Comparative Study of Traditional and Agile Organizations
Keywords:
management systems, agile organizations, traditional organizations, organizational evolution, qualitative comparative study, adaptive management, TehranAbstract
This study aimed to explore how management systems evolve differently in traditional and agile organizations by comparing their structural logics, decision-making routines, learning mechanisms, leadership practices, and adaptation pathways. This qualitative comparative study was conducted among managers and organizational experts working in traditional and agile-oriented organizations in Tehran. Using purposive and maximum-variation sampling, 28 participants were recruited, including 14 participants from traditional organizations and 14 from organizations with agile management structures. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews lasting between 45 and 75 minutes. Theoretical saturation was achieved after the twenty-fourth interview, and four additional interviews were conducted to confirm conceptual adequacy. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis supported by NVivo software. Coding proceeded through open coding, axial categorization, constant comparison, and iterative theme refinement. Trustworthiness was enhanced through member checking, peer debriefing, audit trail documentation, and maximum variation in participant selection. The analysis produced five main categories: structural reconfiguration from hierarchy to networked coordination, transformation of decision-making from authorization-based control to distributed responsiveness, evolution of learning routines from periodic correction to continuous experimentation, leadership role transition from command supervision to enabling facilitation, and emergence of hybrid management pathways that combine procedural stability with adaptive flexibility. Traditional organizations were characterized by formal authority, sequential planning, documentation-heavy control, and risk avoidance, whereas agile organizations emphasized cross-functional collaboration, iterative planning, customer proximity, rapid feedback, and team-level autonomy. However, the findings also showed that agile evolution was not a simple replacement of hierarchy; rather, successful organizations developed hybrid systems that preserved necessary governance while increasing adaptability. Management system evolution is best understood as a gradual reconfiguration of coordination, control, learning, and leadership routines rather than as a linear shift from bureaucracy to agility. Agile organizations do not eliminate structure; they redesign structure around speed, learning, and distributed accountability. The study contributes a qualitative model of evolutionary management pathways and offers practical implications for organizations seeking to balance operational discipline with adaptive capacity.
References
Boehm, B., & Turner, R. (2005). Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations. IEEE Software, 22(5), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2005.129
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. Tavistock.
Conforto, E. C., Salum, F., Amaral, D. C., da Silva, S. L., & de Almeida, L. F. M. (2014). Can agile project management be adopted by industries other than software development? Project Management Journal, 45(3), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21410
Denning, S. (2016). Understanding the three laws of Agile. Strategy & Leadership, 44(6), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-09-2016-0074
Dikert, K., Paasivaara, M., & Lassenius, C. (2016). Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software, 119, 87–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.013
Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 50(9–10), 833–859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11%3C1105::AID-SMJ133%3E3.0.CO;2-E
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Hoda, R., Noble, J., & Marshall, S. (2013). Self-organizing roles on agile software development teams. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 39(3), 422–444. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2012.30
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard Business School, Division of Research.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Prentice-Hall.
Nguyen, T., Le, C. V., Nguyen, M., Nguyen, G., Lien, T. T. H., & Nguyen, O. (2025). The organisational impact of agility: A systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00446-9
Rigby, D. K., Sutherland, J., & Takeuchi, H. (2016). Embracing agile. Harvard Business Review, 94(5), 40–50.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7%3C509::AID-SMJ882%3E3.0.CO;2-Z
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165852
Walter, A. T. (2021). Organizational agility: Ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization. Management Review Quarterly, 71, 343–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00186-6
