Theories concerning the organizational dynamics underlying the dispersion of institutional research activities within colleges are proposed. Two theoretical arguments concern whether or not a centralized, monopolistic institutional research office will be found on a given campus: the informational legitimacy argument and the limited attention argument. Each reflects on the often unmanageable connections between information and power in organizations. The third theoretical argument, the organizational contingency argument, concerns the nature of fragmentation on a given campus. This argument suggests that the particular trajectory of institutional research fragmentation on a campus depends on specific organizational conditions on that campus, as well as on external forces. The applicability of the theoretical perspective is considered, based on a case study analysis of the University of Minnesota. Informational legitimacy was found to be a factor in the fragmentation of institutional research, and limits on attention at the central level were also active in fragmentation. Forces that seem to be active in fragmentation include: the external environment, personalities and career paths, management styles, and power arrangements. (SW)