P. S. Tolbert & L. G. Zucker, "Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: the diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935.", ASQ, 28 (1983), 22-39.

This paper investigates the diffusion of formal organization structure in civil service reform by cities. When civil service procedures are required by the state, they diffuse quickly. When not required, they diffuse slowly. Early adoption is related to city requirements. later adoption are due to institutional definitions of legitimate structural form. Thus the extent of structure adoption is based on the degree of legitimization (by law or by gradual legitimization).

Initial adoption of civil service reform was not due to law in most states. It was partly in response to rampant political corruption and dissatisfaction in service performance. The progressive movement changed the view of city goverment froma political body to a corporation. By 1935 many cities has passed legislation requiring civil service programs.

Prior to 1900 there was much debate about civil service, by the 20's there was little conflict, and by the 30's it was accepted as given.

According to organizational theory, early adoption of an innovative form depends on whether the new form will improve internal processes. Later they are adopted for their societal legitimacy. Often their adoption are mainly symbolic.

In this study, adoption was defined as passage of any legal requirement for civil service procedures. They compared 74 cities from 3 states who mandated civil service to 93 cities randomly picked from US cities that did not mandate civil service reform at the state-level.

They found that when mandated adoption was massive at first and settled down to a quick diffusion. In the cities with no mandate diffusion was more gradual, rapidly increasing as the form become more legitimate.

Then they looked at the potential factors that could predict whether a city would adopt a civil service program (% immigrants, % illiterates, scope, age, size) As expected, city characteristics influenced adoption in the early stages, but less so in later stages. It's clear that history has an important role in organizaitonal study. One cannot ignore the impact of time.