John Leslie King
- ALLEN, B. R. 1982. Computer strategy: A philosophy for managing reformation processing resources. In The Econormcs of Information Processing, vol. 1, R. Goldberg and H. Lorin, Eds. Wiley, New York, pp. 7-18.Google Scholar
- ALLISON, G. T. 1971. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Little, Brown, Boston.Google Scholar
- ARNSTEIN, S. R. 1969. Eight rungs on the ladder of citizen participation. J. Am. Inst. Planners 35, 4 (July), 216-232.Google Scholar
- ARROW, K. J. 1974. On the agenda of organization. In The Corporate Society, R. Marris, Ed. Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
- AXELROD, C. W. 1982. Dynamic planning and control of the net value of data processing. In The Economics of Information Processing, vol. 2, R. Goldberg and H. Lorin, Eds. Wiley, New York, 39-46.Google Scholar
- BENSON, D. H. 1983. A field study of end-user computing: Findings and issues. Manage. Inf. Syst. Q. 7, 4 (Dec.), 33-45.Google Scholar
- BERMAN, P. 1970a. A vote against centralized staff. Datarnation 16, 5 (May), 289-290.Google Scholar
- BERMAN, P. 1970b. Decentralized again. Datarnation 16, 13 (Oct.), 141-142.Google Scholar
- BERNARO, D. 1979. Management issues in cooperatire computing. ACM Comput. Surv. 11, 1 (Mar.), 3-17. Google Scholar
- BLAU, P. M. 1970. A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. Am. Sociol. Rev. 35, 201-218.Google Scholar
- BOEHM, B. 1979. Software engineering: R & D trends and defense needs. In Research Directions m Software Technology, P. Wagner, Ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
- BOEHM, B. W. 1981. Software Engineering Economws. Prentice-Hall, New York. Google Scholar
- BOE~M, B. W., ANO STANmSH, T. A. 1982. Software technology in the 1990s. Department of Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- BRANOON, D. H. 1970. Management Planning {or Data Processing. Brandon/Systems Press, Princeton, N. J.Google Scholar
- BRESLIN, J., AND TASHENBERG, C. B. 1978. D/stributed Processing Systems: End of the Mainframe Era? AMACOM, New York.Google Scholar
- Buccl, G., AND STREETER, D. N. 1979. A methodology for the design of distributed information systems. Commun. ACM 22, 4 (Apr.), 233-245. Google Scholar
- BUCHANAN, J. R., ANO LINOWES, R. G. 1980a. Making distributed data processing work. liaryard Bus. Rev 58, 5 (Sept.~-Oct.), 143-161.Google Scholar
- BUCHANAN, J. R., ANO LINOWES, R. G. 1980b. Understanding distributed data processing. Harvard Bus. Rev. 58, 4 (July-Aug.), 143-154.Google Scholar
- BURLINGAME, J. F. 1961. Information technology and decentralization. Harvard Bus. Rev. 39, 6, 121-126.Google Scholar
- BURNS, T., AND STALKER, M. 1961. The Management of Innovatwn. Tavistock, London.Google Scholar
- Bvss, M. D. 1981. Penny-wise approach to data processing. Harvard Bus. Rev. 59, 4 (July-Aug.), 111-117.Google Scholar
- CARE, E. G., GREMILLION, L. L., AND McKENNEY, J. L. 1979. Price/performance patterns of U.S. computer systems. Cornmun. ACM 22, 4 (Apr.), 225-233. Google Scholar
- CHERVANY, N. C., DICKSON, G. W., AND NAUMANN, J. 1978. Distributed data processing for the State of Minnesota. College of Business Administration, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Nov.Google Scholar
- CmLo, J. 1973. Strategies of control and organizational behavior. Adrnin. ScL Q. 18, 1 (Mar.), 1- 17.Google Scholar
- CHRYSLER, E. 1978. Some bask determinants of computer programming productivity. Commun. ACM 21, 6 (June), 472-483. Google Scholar
- CYERT, R. M., AND MARCH, J. 1963. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall, New York.Google Scholar
- DANZlaER, J. N. 1979. The skill bureaucracy and intraorganizational control. Sociol Work Occup. 6, 204-226.Google Scholar
- DANZiGER, J. N., DUTTON, W. H., KLING, K., AND KRAEMER, K. L. 1982. Computers and Politics: High Technology and American Local Governments. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- DEAROEN, J. 1965. How to organize information systems. Harvard Bus. Rev. 43, 2, 65-73.Google Scholar
- DEARDEN, J., MCFARLAN, F. W., AND ZANI, W. M. 1971. Managing Computer-Based In{ormatwn Systems. Irwin, Homewood, Ill.Google Scholar
- DEMB, A. B. 1975. Centralized vs. decentralized computer systems: A new approach to organizational impacts. CISR Report 12, Center for information Systems Research, Sloan School, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
- DEROzE, B. C., ANO NYMAN, T. H. 1978. The software life cycle: A management and technological challenge in the Department of Defense. IEEE Trans. So{tw. Eng. SE-4, 4 (July), 309-313.Google Scholar
- D'OLIVERIA, C. R. 1977. An analysis of computer decentralization. AD-A045 526, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., Oct.Google Scholar
- DOLOTTA, T. A., BERNSTEIN, M. I., DICKSON, R. S., FRANCE, N. A., ROSENBLATT, B. A., SMITH, D. M., AND STEEL, T. B. 1976. Data Processing in 1980-1985. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- DOWNS, A. 1967. Insgte Bureaucracy. Little, Brown, Boston.Google Scholar
- EOELMAN, F. 1981. Managers, computer systems, and productivity. Manage. In{. Syst. Q. 3, 3 (Sept.), 1-20.Google Scholar
- EDP ANALYZER 1980a. Educating executives on new technology. EDP Anal. 18, 11 (Nov.).Google Scholar
- EDP ANALYZER 1980b. Risk assessment for distributed systems. EDP Anal. 18, 4 (Apr.).Google Scholar
- EDP ANALYZER 1980C. Tools for building distributed systems. EDP Anal. 18, 10 (Oct.).Google Scholar
- EDPIDR 1979. The trend to decentralization, Part 2. EDP In-Depth Rep. 8, 5, 1-13.Google Scholar
- EIN-DOR, P., AND SEGEV, E. 1978. Managing Management In{ormation Systems Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass.Google Scholar
- FISHER, D. A. 1974. Automatic data processing costs in the defense department. Paper 1046, Institute for Defense Analysis, Oct.Google Scholar
- FOREST, R. B. 1977. Centralization vs. distributed processing vs. anarchy. DP Dig 23, 1 (Jan.), 1-2.Google Scholar
- FREEMAN, P. 1983. Reusable software engineering: Concepts and research directions. Dept. of information and Computer Science, Univ. of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE 1977. Problems found with Government Acquisition of and Use of Computers: 1965-December 1976. General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., FGMSD-77, Mar. 15.Google Scholar
- GIBSON, C., AND NOLAN, R. L. 1974. Managing the four stages of EDP growth. Harvard Bus Rev. 52, 1 (Jan.-Feb.), 76-84.Google Scholar
- GLASER, G. 1970. The centralization vs. decentralization issue: Arguments, alternatives and guidelines. Data Base 2, 3 (Mar.), 1-7.Google Scholar
- GOLUB, H. 1975. Organizing information system resources: Centralization vs. decentralization. In The In{ormatwn Systems Handbook. F. W. McFarlan and R. L. Nolan, Eds. Dow Jones- Irwin, Homewood, Ill.Google Scholar
- GROSCH, H. A. 1953. High speed arithmetic: The digital computer as a research tool. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 43, 4 (Apr.), 11-16.Google Scholar
- GROSCH, H. A. 1975. Grosch's Law revisited. Computerworld 8, 16, 24.Google Scholar
- GROSCH, H. A. 1977. On costs. Comput. Eur. 5, 26 (June 30), 16.Google Scholar
- GROSCH, H. A. 1979. On Grosch's Law. Cornrnun. ACM 22, 6 (June), 376.Google Scholar
- HANNAN, J., ANO FRIED, L. 1977. Should you decentralize? Comput. Decis. 9, 2 (Feb.), 40-42.Google Scholar
- INFOTECH INTERNATIONAL 1977a. Distributed Processing 1: Analysis and bibliography. Infotech international, Maidenhead, England.Google Scholar
- INFOTECH INTERNATIONAL 1977b. Distributed Processing 2: Invited papers. Infotech International, Maidenhead, England.Google Scholar
- JENKINS, J. M., ANO SANTOS, R. S. 1982. Centralization vs. decentralization of data processing functions. In The Economics of Information Proc. esslng, vol. 2, R. Goldberg and H. Lorin, Eds. Wiley, New York, pp. 62-67.Google Scholar
- JOPLIN, B. 1967. Centralizing data processing facilities--A case study. Municip. Fmanc. 39, 4, 161- 166.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L. 1978. Centralization vs. Decentrahzation o{ Computing: An Empirical Assessment in City Governments. Public Policy Research Organization, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L. 1980. Centralized and Decentralized Issues {or Computing Management Public Policy Research Organization, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L. 1982a. Local government use of informarion technology: The next decade. Public Adm. Rev. 42, 1, 25-36.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L. 1982b. Organizational cost considerations in centralized vs. decentralized computing operations. In The Economics o{ Information Processing, vol. 2, R. Goldberg and H. Lorin, Eds. Wiley, New York, pp. 68-81.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L., AND KRAEMER, K. L. 1981. Cost of a social impact of information technologies. In Telecommunwatwns and Productivity, M. Moss, Ed. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L., AND KRAEMER, K. L. 1984. The Dynamws o{ Cornputmg. Public Policy Research Organization, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- KING, J. L., AND SCHREMS, E. L. 1978. Cost-benefit analysis for information systems development and operation. ACM Cornput. Surv. 10, 1 (Mar.), 19-34. Google Scholar
- KUNG, R. 1978. Automated welfare client-tracking and service integration: The political economy of computing. Commun. ACM 21, 6 (June), 484-493. Google Scholar
- KLING, R. 1980. Social analyses of computing: Theoretical perspectives in recent empirical research. ACM Cornput. Surv. 12, 1 (Mar.), 61-110. Google Scholar
- KLING, R., AND SCACCnl, W. 1979. Recurrent dilemmas of computer use in complex organizations. In Proceedings o{ the AFIPS 1979 Conference, vol. 48. AFIPS Press, Reston, Va., pp. 107-115.Google Scholar
- K,.INO, R., AND SCACCHI, W. 1982. The web of computing: Computer technology at social organization. In Advances in Computers, vol. 21, M. Yovits, Ed. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L. 1982. Telecommunications/transportation substitution and energy conservation, Part 1. Telecommun. Policy 6, 1, 39-59.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L., AND DUTTON, W. H. 1979. The interests served by technological reform: The case of computing. Adm $oc 11, 1, 80-106.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L., AND KING, J. L. 1976. Computers, power and urban management. Sage Publ., Beverly Hills, Calif.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L., AND KING, J. L. 1979. A requiem for USAC. Pohcy Anal 5, 3, 313-349.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L., AND KING, J. L. 1981. Computing policies and problems: A stage theory approach. Telecornrnun. Policy 5, 3, 198-215.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L., AND KING J. L. 1982. Telecommunications/transportation substitution and energy conservation, Part 2. Telecommun. Policy 6, 2, 87-99.Google Scholar
- KRAEMER, K. L., DVTTON, W. H., AND NORTHRUP, A. 1981. The Management of In{ormat~on Systerns. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- LAWRENCE, R., AND LORSCH, J. W. 1969. Organization and Environment' Managing Differentiatwn and Integration. Irwin, Homewood, Ill.Google Scholar
- LEDBETTER L. E. 1980. The So{tware Life Cycle Model.' Implications {or Program Development Support Systems. Schlumberger-Doll Res., Ridgefield, Conn.Google Scholar
- LEINTZ, B. P., ANO SWANSON, E. B. 1974. Software maintenance: A user-management tug of war. Data Manage. 4, 26-30.Google Scholar
- LEINTZ, B. P., SWANSON, E. B., AND THOMPKINS, G. E. 1978. Characteristics of application software maintenance. Cornmun. ACM 21, 6 (June), 466- 471. Google Scholar
- LITTREL, R. F. 1974. Economies of scale in the IBM 360 and 370. Datarnat~on 20, 3 (Mar.), 33-36.Google Scholar
- LONO, L. E. 1982. Design and strategy for corporate information systems: MIS long-range planning. Prentice-Hall, New York. Google Scholar
- LUCAS, H. C. 1982. Alternative structures for the management of information processing. In The Economics of Information Processing, vol. 2, R. Goldberg and H. Lorin, Eds. Wiley, New York, pp. 55-61.Google Scholar
- LUCAS, H. C., JR. 1984. Organizational power and the information services department. Commun. ACM 27, 1 (Jan.), 58-65. Google Scholar
- MARKUS, M. L. 1981. The politics of implementation: Top management support and user involvement. Syst. Objectives Solutions 1, 4, 203-216.Google Scholar
- MCFARL^N, F. W. 1972. Problems in planning the information system. Harvard Bus. Rev. 49, 2 (Mar.-Apr.), 75-89.Google Scholar
- MCKENNEY, J. E., AND MCFARL&N, F. W. 1982. The information archipelago: Maps and bridges. Harvard Bus. Rev. 60, 5 (Sept.-Oct.), 109-119.Google Scholar
- MERTES, L. H. 1981. Doing your office over electronically. Harvard Bus. Rev. 59, 2 (Mar.-Apr.), 127-135.Google Scholar
- MEYER, M. W. 1972. Size and structure of organizations: A causal analysis. Am. Sociol. Rev. 37, 4 (Aug.), 434-440.Google Scholar
- MOLOOW, B. D. 1982. The economic impact of networking. In The Economics of information Processing, vol. 1, R. Goldberg and H. Lorin, Eds. Wiley, New York, pp. 44-51.Google Scholar
- MOORE, W. E. 1962. The Conduct o{ the Corporation. Random House, New York.Google Scholar
- MOORE, W. E. 1967. Order and Change. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- MORmSEY, J. H., AND WU, L. S. Y. 1979. Software engineering--An economic perspective. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Software Engineering, 79CH1479-5C. IEEE, New York, pp. 412-422. Google Scholar
- NmKANSEN, W. A. 1973. Bureaucracy: Servant or Mastery institute of Economic Affairs, London.Google Scholar
- NOLAN, R. L. 1973. Managing the computer resource: A stage hypothesis, Commun. ACM. 16, 7 (July), 399-405. Google Scholar
- NOLAN, R. L. 1977. Management Accounting and Control of Data Processing. National Association of Accountants, New York.Google Scholar
- NOLAN, R. L. 1979. Managing the crises in data processing. Harvard Bus. Rev. 59, 2 (Mar.-Apr.), 115-126.Google Scholar
- NOLAN, R. L. 1982. Managing information systems by committee. Harvard Bus. Rev. 60, 4 (July- Aug.), 71-79.Google Scholar
- NOLAN, R. L., MCFARLAN, F. W., AND NORTON, D. 1973. In{ormation Systems Administration. Holt, New York.Google Scholar
- OLDEHOEFT, A. E., AND HAl. STEAD, M. H. 1972. Maximum computing power and cost factors in the centralization problem. Commun. ACM 15, 2 (Feb.), 94-96. Google Scholar
- OLSON, M. H. 1983. Remote office work: Changing patterns in space and time. Commun. ACM 26, 3 (Mar.), 182-188. Google Scholar
- ORLICKY, J. 1969. The Successful Computer System: Its Planning, Development, and Management in a Business Enterprise. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
- PATRICK, R. L. 1976. Decentralizing hardware and dispersing responsibility. Datamatwn 5, 79-84.Google Scholar
- PAUL, L. 1982. Micro-CPU link eluding DPers. Computerworld (Nov. 8), 1.Google Scholar
- PERLMAN, J. A. 1965. Centralization vs. decentralization. Datamation 11, 9, 24-29.Google Scholar
- PERROW, C. 1979. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay, 2nd ed. Scott-Foresman, Glenview, I11.Google Scholar
- PERROW, C. 1982. Not risk but power. A review of Schwing, R. C., and Albers, W. A., Jr. Societal R~sk Assessment. How Sale Is Enough? Conternp. Sociol. 11, 3, 298-299.Google Scholar
- PETTiGREW, A. M. 1972. Information control as a power resource. Sociology 6, 179-205.Google Scholar
- PFEFFER, J. 1982. Organizations and Organization Theory. Pittman, Marshfield, Mass.Google Scholar
- PmSTER, M., JR. 1975. Shared systems vs. stand alone systems. Harvard University Program on Information Technology and Public Policy working paper 75-1, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
- PHISTER, M., JR. 1979. Data Processing Technology and Economics. Digital Press, Bedford, Mass. Google Scholar
- PRICE, D. G. 1965. The development of computer centralization. In Economics o{ Automatic Data Processing. A. B. Frielink, Ed. Elsevier North- Holland, New York.Google Scholar
- PRICE, H. 1969. Centralized versus decentralized data processing in municipal government. Data Process. 14, 389-402.Google Scholar
- PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ORGANIZATION (PPRO) 1980. Orange County Facilities Management. Public Policy Research Organization, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- REYNOLDS, C. H. 1977. Issues in centralization. Datamation 23, 3, 91-100.Google Scholar
- ROARK, A. 1971. Centralization vs. decentralization. In Proceedings of the 2nd Con{erence of the Society for Management Information Systems. Society for Management Information Systems, Chicago.Google Scholar
- ROBBINS, C. 1975. Distributed data processing. Data Manage. 13, 6, 71-75.Google Scholar
- ROBEY, D. 1981. Computer information systems and organization structure. Commun. ACM 24, 10 (Oct.), 679-687. Google Scholar
- ROCKART J. F., BULLEN, C. V., AND KOGAN, J. N. 1979. The management of distributed processing. CISR Report 39, Center for Informatwn Systerns Research, MIT Sloan School, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
- ROMER, M. 1979. Comments on the costs of software maintenance made at the 1979 annual conference of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (San Diego Calif., Aug.).Google Scholar
- SALERNO, L. M. 1981. Catching up with the compurer revolution. Keeping informed. Harvard Bus. Rev. 59, 6 (Nov.-Dec.), 8-24.Google Scholar
- SCACCHI, W. S. 1981. The Process o{ Innovatwn in Computing. Department of Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
- SCACCH!, W. S. 1984. Managing software projects: a social analysis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. SE-iO, 1 (Jan.), 49-59.Google Scholar
- SCOTT-MORTON, M. S. 1975. Organizing the informarion function for effectiveness as well as efficiency. CISR Report 39, Center for Information Systems Research, MIT Sloan School, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
- SELWYN, L. L. 1970. Economies of scale in computer use: Initial tests and implications for the computer utility. Project MAC Technical Report TR- 68, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. Google Scholar
- SHARPE, W. F. 1969. The Economics o{ Computers. Columbia University Press, New York. Google Scholar
- SIMON, H. A., KOMETSKY, G., GUETZKOW, H., ANO TYNDALL, G. 1954. Centrahzation vs. Decentralizatwn m Organizing the Controller's Department. The Controllership Foundation, New York.Google Scholar
- SOLOMON, M. B., JR. 1966. Economies of scale and the IBM System/360. Commun. ACM 9, 6 (June), 435-440. Google Scholar
- SOLOMON, M. B. 1970a. Economies of scale and computer personnel. Datamatwn 16, 3 (Mar.), 107-110.Google Scholar
- SOLOMON, M. B. 1970b. Economies of scale defended. Datamation 16, 6 (July), 293-294.Google Scholar
- SPRAGUE, R. H., AND CARLSON, E. D. 1982. Building Effective Decision Support Systems. Prentice- Hall, New York. Google Scholar
- STATLAND, N. 1979. Computer systems: Centralized or dispersed? Adm. Manage. 39, 3, 57.Google Scholar
- STREETER D. N. 1973. Centralization or dispersion of computing facilities. IBM Syst. J 12, 3, 183- 301.Google Scholar
- TURKLE, S. 1979. Comments on the reasons behind user procurement of personal computer systems, made at the irvine Conference on Social Issues and Impacts of Computing (Lake Arrowhead, Calif., Aug.).Google Scholar
- UTTAL, B. 1982. What's detaining the office of the future. Fortune (May 3), 176-196.Google Scholar
- VITALARI, N. P., AND VENKATESH, A. 1984. Shi{ts m the allocation of time: The case o{ computing in the home. Public Policy Research Organization, University of California, irvine.Google Scholar
- WAGNER, F. V. 1976. Is decentralization inevitable? Datamat~on 22, 11, 86-97.Google Scholar
- WAGNER, L. G. 1966. Computers, decentralizations, and corporate control. Call{ Manage. Rev. 9, 2, 25-32.Google Scholar
- WEBER, M. 1947. The Theory o{ Social and Economic Organization Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- WEBER, M. 1952. The essentials of bureaucratic organization: An ideal-type construction, in Reader in Bureaucracy, R. Merton, Ed. Free Press, Glencoe Ill.Google Scholar
- WEISS, E. A. 1975. Centralization or decentralization: Which is best? Computerworld (Sept. 24), 29.Google Scholar
- WILDAVSKY, A. B. 1976. The Politzcs o{ the Budgetary Process Little, Brown, Boston.Google Scholar
- WITHINGTON, F. G. 1969. Data processing's envolving place in the organization. Datamation 15, 6 (June), 58-68.Google Scholar
- WITHINGTON, F. G. 1973. Crystal bailing: Trends in EDP management. Infosysterns 20, 1, 20-21.Google Scholar
- WITHINGTON, F. G. 1980. Coping with computer proliferation. Harvard Bus. Rev. 58, 3 (May- June), 152-164.Google Scholar
- YIN, R. 1979. Production efficiency vs. bureaucratic self-interest: Two innovative processes? Policy Sc~ 8, 381-399.Google Scholar
- ZANNETOS, Z. 1965. On the theory of divisional structures: Some aspects of centralization and decentralization of control and decisionmaking. Management Sc~. 12, 4, B49--B67.Google Scholar
- ZEL~OW!TZ, M. V. 1978. Perspectives on software engineering. ACM Comput. Surv. 10, 2 (june), 197-216. Google Scholar
Recommendations
Decentralised approaches for network management
Centralised network management has shown inadequacy for efficient management of large heterogenous networks. As a result, several distributed approaches have been adapted to overcome the problem. This paper is a review of decentralised network ...
Contrasting Centralized and Decentralized Critics in Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning
AAMAS '21: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent SystemsCentralized Training for Decentralized Execution, where agents are trained offline using centralized information but execute in a decentralized manner online, has gained popularity in the multi-agent reinforcement learning community. In particular, ...
Can decentralized algorithms outperform centralized algorithms? a case study for decentralized parallel stochastic gradient descent
NIPS'17: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing SystemsMost distributed machine learning systems nowadays, including TensorFlow and CNTK, are built in a centralized fashion. One bottleneck of centralized algorithms lies on high communication cost on the central node. Motivated by this, we ask, can ...
Comments