The concept of organizational pathology in the conceptual arsenal of sociologists plays the role of a metaphor rather than a constructive basis. It is no accident that the Polish researcher Ya. Staniskis, who in 1972 was probably the first to use the concept of pathology (1) in the analysis of organizational structures, did not specifically develop it conceptually and did not use it later. As far as we know, this concept is not systematically used in Western works on the sociology of organizations. Creative development of the category of organizational pathology can be found in A. I. Prigozhin and the management consulting specialists who united around him in the 80s. Thanks to them, the term was included in Russian dictionaries and textbooks. They described the types of pathology. Organizational pathology is understood as a dysfunction of organizations, i.e. a persistent violation of normal functioning, when failures are detected in the organization for some very important and difficult to eradicate reasons (2). A phenomenological sign of the pathological state of the organization is goal achievement - the inability of the organization to achieve its goal. Such a definition seems perfectly acceptable with only one exception- page 44 note: you must specify the reference frame (social structure) within which this function is defined. So, for a commercial organization, its functionality or dysfunctionality can be quite reliably established within the organization itself through indicators of its profitability and liquidity. As for the budget organization, it is functional in other categories. The pathological state of an organization manifests itself in numerous deviations that occur in the structure, management process, behavior of members of the organization, their relationships, etc.However, an attempt to identify organizational pathology through the analysis of deviations seems unpromising, since it is based on the assumption that it is possible to establish some ... Read more