Mobilizing and sustaining grassroots activism in the National Organization for Women, 1966-2000 : by Maryann Barakso.
Name
50305953-MIT.pdf
Description
Full printable version
Size
19.4 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
b7c896f65db0d7031048f7aab473c70d
Author(s)
Barakso, Maryann, 1967-
Advisor(s)
Stephen Ansolabehere.
Alternative Title
Mobilizing and sustaining grassroots activism in NOW, 1966-2000
Date Issued
2001
Publisher
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Abstract
This dissertation examines how the National Organization for Women (NOW) survived the vagaries of both the political environment and its intraorganizational problems and controversies over its thirty-five year history. It considers the role that patrons, the state, mobilizing structures, leaders, organizational structure, strategic flexibility, and collective identity played in NOW's creation and maintenance. Little support is found for the role of patrons or of the state in NOW's origination and sustenance. Mobilizing structures, in the form of social networks, however, proved crucial factors supporting NOW between 1966 and 1971, its founding period. NOW's organizational structure, particularly its (limited) professionalization and its federalization both assisted NOW in overcoming potentially crippling information gaps between members and leaders. However, federalization has not had an entirely benign effect. In addition to allowing a great deal of autonomy, NOW's federal structure also permitted the development of strong intraorganizational factions. Leaders positively influenced organizational stability by enhancing NOW's collective identity and by stewarding the group towards new strategies. However, NOW's strong identity acts as a constraint upon leaders' ability to change the organization's goals or tactical approach. NOW's longevity and institutionalization over time suggests a second set of issues which are examined in this study. How has NOW's aging affected the organization's attention to its founding principles?
(cont.) How is NOW different from interest group organizations who rely mainly on checks, rather than member involvement, for their sustenance? The ways in which NOW is different from the average "interest group" are outlined, as is its continuing commitment to radical politics and to its founding principles.
Description
Thesis (Ph. D.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Political Science, 2001.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 278-294).
Subjects
Political Science.
MIT Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Science
Terms of Use
M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.
Persistent DSpace Link
