An Empirical Analysis of the Contractual and Information Structures of Business Process Outsourcing Relationships

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0374

References

  • Anand B., Khanna T. Do firms learn to create value? The case of alliances. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21:295–315CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Anderson J. C., Narus J. A. A model of the distributor's firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. J. Marketing (1990) 54:42–58CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Argyres N. The impact of information technology on coordination: Evidence from the B-2 “stealth” bomber. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10(2):162–180LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Armstrong J. S., Overton T. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J. Marketing Res. (1977) 14:396–402CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Aron R., Singh J. IT enabled strategic outsourcing: Knowledge intensive firms, information work and the extended organizational form. (2003) . Knowledge@Wharton, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  • Aron R., Singh J. V. Getting offshoring right. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2005) 8(12):135–143Google Scholar
  • Arrow K. J.The Limits of Organization (1974) (W. W. Norton & Co., New York) Google Scholar
  • Bajari P., Tadelis S. Incentives versus transaction costs: A theory of procurement contracts. RAND J. Econom. (2001) 32(3):387–407CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bakos J. Y., Brynjolfsson E. From vendors to partners: The role of information technology and incomplete contracts in buyer-supplier relationships. J. Organ. Comput. (1993) 3(3):301–328CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Banerjee A. V., Duflo E. Reputation effects and the limits of contracting: A study of the Indian software industry. Quart. J. Econom. (2000) 115(3):989–1017CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Barber M. B., Venkatraman M. The determinants of satisfaction for a high envelopment product: Three rival hypotheses and their implications in the health care context. Adv. Consumer Res. (1986) 13:317–320Google Scholar
  • Bensaou M., Venkatraman N. Configurations of interorganizational relationships: A comparison between U.S. and Japanese automakers. Management Sci. (1995) 41(9):1471–1492LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Brynjolffson E. Information assets, technology and organization. Management Sci. (1994) 40:1645–1663LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Clemons E. K., Row M. C. Limits to inter-firm coordination through information technology: Results of a field study in consumer packaged goods distribution. J. Management Inform. Systems (1993) 10(1):73–95CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Crocker K., Reynolds K. J. The efficiency of incomplete contracts: An empirical analysis of Air Force engine procurement. RAND J. Econom. (1993) 24(1):126–146CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dyer J. H., Singh H. The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad. Management Rev. (1998) 23(4):660–679CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Galbraith J. R.Designing Complex Organizations (1973) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
  • Ghoshal S., Moran P. Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Acad. Management Rev. (1996) 21(1):31–47CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gioia D. A., Thomas J. B. Identity, image and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1996) 41:370–403CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gopal A., Sivaramakrishnan K., Krishnan M. S., Mukhopadhyay T. Contracts in offshore software development: An empirical analysis. Management Sci. (2003) 49(12):1671–1683LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gottfredson M., Puryear R., Phillips S. Strategic sourcing from periphery to the core. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2005) 8(2):2–9Google Scholar
  • Gulati R., Nickerson J. A. Interorganizational trust, governance choice, and exchange performance. Organ. Sci. (2008) 19(5):688–708LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Gulati R., Singh H. The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1998) 43:781–814CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gulati R., Lawrence P. R., Puranam P. Adaptation in vertical relationships: Beyond incentive conflict. Strategic Management J. (2005) 26:415–440CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Halvey J. K., Melby B. M.Business Process Outsourcing—Process, Strategies and Contracts (2000) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) Google Scholar
  • Hamilton B. A., Nickerson J. A. Correcting for endogeneity in strategic management research. Strategic Organ. (2003) 1(1):51–78CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heckman J. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica (1979) 47(1):153–161CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heide J. B. Inter-organizational governance in marketing channels. J. Marketing (1994) 58(1):71–85CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heide J. B., John G. Alliances in industrial purchasing: The determinants of joint action in buyer-supplier relationships. J. Marketing Res. (1990) 27(1):24–36CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heide J. B., John G. Do norms matter in marketing relationships? J. Marketing (1992) 56(2):32–44CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Holmstrom B., Milgrom P. Multi-task principal-agent problems: Incentive contracts, asset ownership and job design. J. Law, Econom. Organ. (1991) 7(special issue):24–52CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jensen M., Meckling W. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J. Financial Econom. (1976) 3:305–360CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Johnson L. K. Successful business process outsourcing (Intelligence Section). Sloan Management Rev. (2006) 47(2):5–6Google Scholar
  • Joskow P. L. Asset specificity and the structure of vertical relationships: Empirical test of transaction cost analysis. J. Law, Econom. Organ. (1988) 4:121–139Google Scholar
  • Lacity M. C., Willcocks L. P. An empirical investigation of information technology sourcing practices: Lessons from experience. MIS Quart. (1998) 22:363–408CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Lee L., Maddala G., Trost R. Asymptotic covariance matrices of two-stage probit and two-stage tobit methods for simultaneous equation models with selectivity. Econometrica (1980) 48:491–503CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Linder J. C. Transformational outsourcing. Sloan Management Rev. (2004) 45(2):52–58Google Scholar
  • Mani D., Barua A., Whinston A. An empirical analysis of the impact of information capabilities design on business process outsourcing performance. (2007) . Working paper, University of Texas at Austin, AustinGoogle Scholar
  • March J. G., Simon H. A.Organizations (1958) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
  • Mayer K. J., Argyres N. S. Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal computer industry. Organ. Sci. (2004) 14(4):394–410LinkGoogle Scholar
  • McCann J., Galbraith J. R., Nystrom P. C., Starbuck W. H. Interdepartmental relations. Handbook of Organizational Design (1981) 1(Oxford University Press, New York) 60–84Google Scholar
  • Mohr J., Spekman R. Characteristics of partnership success: partnership attributes, communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques. Strategic Management J. (1994) 15(2):135–142CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Monteverde K. Technical dialog as an incentive for vertical integration in the semiconductor industry. Management Sci. (1995) 41(10):1624–1639LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Nooteboom B., Berger J., Noorderhaven N. G. Effects of trust and governance on relational risk. Acad. Management J. (1997) 40(2):308–338CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J.-Y., Podsakoff N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psych. (2003) 88(5):879–903CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Poppo L., Zenger T. Testing alternative theories of the firm: Transaction cost, knowledge-based, and measurement explanations for make-or-buy decisions in information services. Strategic Management J. (1998) 19(9):853–877CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Poppo L., Zenger T. Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic Management J. (2002) 23:707–725CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Puranam P., Gulati R. The social and contractual structure of vertical relationships. (2005) . SSRN Working paper, London Business School, LondonGoogle Scholar
  • Quinn J. B., Baruch J. J., Zien K. A.Innovation Explosion: Using Intellect and Software to Revolutionize Growth Strategies (1997) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
  • Rouse A. C., Corbitt B. J., Hirschheim R., Heinzl A., Dibbern J. Business process outsourcing: The hysteresis effect and other lessons. Information Systems Outsourcing: Enduring Themes (2006) (Springer, Berlin) 583–602New Perspectives and Global ChallengesCrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shaver J. M. Accounting for endogeneity when assessing strategy performance: Does entry mode choice affect FDI survival? Management Sci. (1998) 44(4):571–585LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Sinha K. K., Van de Ven A. Designing work within and between organizations. Organ. Sci. (2005) 16(4):389–408LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Sitkin S. B., Roth N. L. Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organ. Sci.: J. Inst. Management Sci. (1993) 4(3):367–392LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Smith J. P., Smith J. P. Introduction. Female Labor Supply: Theory and Estimation (1980) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 3–23Google Scholar
  • Sobrero M., Schrader S. Structuring inter-firm relationships: A meta-analytic approach. Organ. Stud. (1998) 19:585–615CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tushman M. L., Nadler D. A. Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad. Management Rev. (1978) 3(3):613–624CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Weiss A. M., Anderson E. Converting from independent to employee salesforces: The role of perceived switching costs. J. Marketing Res. (1992) 29(1):101–115CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Williamson O. E. Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1991) 36:269–296CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.