The distribution of authority within organizations has been a central focus in management science, with contemporary research highlighting the advantages and challenges of decentralization versus centralization. Decentralized authority fosters dynamic decision-making and autonomy, whereas centralized authority ensures stability and uniformity. Self-managing organizations (SMOs) have emerged as a promising paradigm, aiming to radically decentralize authority by eliminating hierarchical reporting relationships and distributing decision-making rights. Despite this promise, the implementation of decentralized authority faces challenges, including resistance to change and systemic constraints. This research-in-progress investigates how SMOs are designed to facilitate decentralized authority and how authority is consequentially used. Through a sociotechnical systems (STS) lens, we examine the interplay between social and technical subsystems, focusing on organizational structure, culture, formalization of rules, information sharing, and distributed work designs. Our preliminary findings suggest that successful decentralization relies on specific configurations of these components to establish systems of decentralized authority characterized by legitimization of authority. By employing qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), we contribute to the limited empirical evidence on configurational organizational designs. This study advances theorizing on decentralized authority, offering insights for scholars in strategic management, organizational behaviour, and organization theory, and expanding knowledge of SMOs beyond high-profile case studies.
