Searching for Structure: Formal Organization Design as a Guide to Network Evolution

References

• Ahuja G, Soda G, Zaheer A (2012) The genesis and dynamics of organizational networks. Organ. Sci. 23(2):434–448.Link, Google Scholar
• Barabási A-L, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286(5439):509–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barley SR (1990) The alignment of technology and structure through roles and networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 30(1):61–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baum JAC, Rowley T, Shipilov AV, Chuang Y-T (2005) Dancing with strangers: Aspiration performance and the search for underwriting syndicate partners. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(4):536–575.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bensaou BM, Galunic C, Jonczyk-Sédès C (2014) Players and purists: Networking strategies and agency of service professionals. Organ. Sci. 25(1):29–56.Link, Google Scholar
• Bird C, Pattison D, D’Souza R, Filkov V, Devanbu P (2008) Latent social structure in open source projects. Proc. 16th ACM SIGSOFT Internat. Sympos. Foundations Software Engrg. (ACM, New York), 24–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Cross R (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Sci. 49(4):432–445.Link, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ, Galaskiewicz J, Greve HR, Tsai W (2004) Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective. Acad. Management J. 47(6):795–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM (1997) The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(1):1–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burns TE, Stalker GM (1961) The Management of Innovation (Tavistock, London).Google Scholar
• Buskens V, van de Rijt A (2008) Dynamics of networks if everyone strives for structural holes. Amer. J. Sociology 114(2):371–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlile PR (2004) Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organ. Sci. 15(5):555–568.Link, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Lobo MS (2008) When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(4):655–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Lobo MS (2014) Affective primacy in intraorganizational task networks. Organ. Sci. 26(2):373–389.Link, Google Scholar
• Cross R, Borgatti SP, Parker A (2002) Making invisible work visible: Using social network analysis to support strategic collaboration. California Management Rev. 44(2):25–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A behavioral theory of the firm. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Dahlander L, McFarland DA (2013) Ties that last: Tie formation and persistence in research collaborations over time. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(1):69–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis JP, Eisenhardt KM, Bingham CB (2009) Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(3):413–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dawkins R (1986) The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design (WW Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
• DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 48(2):147–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doz YL, Santos J, Williamson P (2001) From Global to Metanational: How Companies Win in the Knowledge Economy (Harvard Business Press, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D (2004) Bounded rationality and the search for organizational architecture: An evolutionary perspective on the design of organizations and their evolvability. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(3):404–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foster KW (2015) A network-learning model of strategic change. Submission 17177. Accepted for the 2015 Academy of Management Annual Meeting.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gabaix X (2009) Power laws in economics and finance. Annual Rev. Econom. 1(1):255–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallus J (2017) Fostering public good contributions with symbolic awards: A large-scale natural field experiment at Wikipedia. Management Sci. 63(12):3999–4015.Link, Google Scholar
• Gargiulo M, Benassi M (2000) Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organ. Sci. 11(2):183–196.Link, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Levinthal D (2000) Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):113–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Greve HR, Levinthal DA, Ocasio W (2012) The behavioral theory of the firm: Assessment and prospects. Acad. Management Ann. 6(1):1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gerwin D (1981) Relationships between structure and technology. Nystrom PC, Starbuck WH, eds. Handbook of Organizational Design, Vol. 2 (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 3–38.Google Scholar
• Gokpinar B, Hopp WJ, Iravani SMR (2010) The impact of misalignment of organizational structure and product architecture on quality in complex product development. Management Sci. 56(3): 468–484.Link, Google Scholar
• Granovetter M (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. Amer. J. Sociology 91(3):481–510.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR (1998) Performance, aspirations, and risky organizational change. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(1):58–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Puranam P (2009) Renewal through reorganization: The value of inconsistencies between formal and informal organization. Organ. Sci. 20(2):422–440.Link, Google Scholar
• Hannan MT, Freeman J (1977) The population ecology of organizations. Amer. J. Sociology 82(5):929–964.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hansen MT (2009) When internal collaboration is bad for your company. Harvard Bus. Rev. 87(4):82–88.Google Scholar
• Heath C, Staudenmayer N (2000) Coordination neglect: How lay theories of organizing complicate coordination in organizations. Res. Organ. Behav. 22:153–191.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson RM, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):9–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE (2014a) Inside the black box of the corporate staff: Social networks and the implementation of corporate strategy. Strategic Management J. 35(1):24–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE (2014b) Network responsiveness: The social structural microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Acad. Management Perspect. 28(4):353–367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE, Tushman ML (2013) Discretion within constraint: homophily and structure in a formal organization. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1316–1336.Link, Google Scholar
• Knudsen T, Srikanth K (2014) Coordinated exploration: Organizing joint search by multiple specialists to overcome mutual confusion and joint myopia. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(3):409–441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kratzer J, Gemuenden HG, Lettl C (2008) Revealing dynamics and consequences of fit and misfit between formal and informal networks in multi-institutional product development collaborations. Res. Policy 37(8):1356–1370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Von Hippel E (2003) How open source software works: “free” user-to-user assistance. Res. Policy 32(6):923–943.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lave CA, March JG (1993) An Introduction to Models in the Social Sciences (University Press of America, Lanham, MD).Google Scholar
• Lavie D, Rosenkopf L (2006) Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Acad. Management J. 49(4):797–818.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW (1967) Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 12(1):1–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levine SS, Prietula MJ (2012) How knowledge transfer impacts performance: A multilevel model of benefits and liabilities. Organ. Sci. 23(6):1748–1766.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Lounamaa PH, March JG (1987) Adaptive coordination of a learning team. Management Sci. 33(1):107–123.Link, Google Scholar
• Lovas B, Ghoshal S (2000) Strategy as guided evolution. Strategic Management J. 875–896.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (Wiley Press, New York).Google Scholar
• McEvily B, Soda G, Tortoriello M (2014) More formally: Rediscovering the missing link between formal organization and informal social structure. Acad. Management Ann. 8(1):299–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer JW, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Amer. J. Sociology 83(2):340–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mihm J, Loch C, Huchzermeier A (2003) Problem-solving oscillations in complex engineering projects. Management Sci. 49(6):733–750.Link, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H (1978) Patterns in strategy formation. Management Sci. 24(9):934–948.Link, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H (1979) The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H, McHugh A (1985) Strategy formation in an adhocracy. Admin. Sci. Quart. 30(2):160–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadler DA, Tushman ML (1997) Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickerson JA, Zenger TR (2002) Being efficiently fickle: A dynamic theory of organizational choice. Organ. Sci. 13(5):547–566.Link, Google Scholar
• Nohria N, Eccles RG (1992) Face-to-Face: Making Network Organizations Work in Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Perrow C (1972) Complex Organizations (Random House, New York).Google Scholar
• Posen HE, Levinthal DA (2012) Chasing a moving target: Exploitation and exploration in dynamic environments. Management Sci. 58(3):587–601.Link, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Håkonsson DD (2015) Valve’s way. J. Organ. Design 4(2): 2–4.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Swamy M (2016) How initial representations shape coupled learning processes. Organ. Sci. 27(2):323–335.Link, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Stieglitz N, Osman M, Pillutla MM (2015) Modelling bounded rationality in organizations: Progress and prospects. Acad. Management Ann. 9(1):337–392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW, Siggelkow N (2003) Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Sci. 49(3):290–311.Link, Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW, Siggelkow N (2006) Organizing to strategize in the face of interactions: Preventing premature lock-in. Long Range Planning 39(6):591–614.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Romanelli E, Tushman ML (1994) Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Acad. Management J. 37(5):1141–1166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salancik GR (1995) Wanted: A good network theory of organization. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(2):345–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling MA, Fang C (2014) When hubs forget, lie, and play favorites: Interpersonal network structure, information distortion, and organizational learning. Strategic Management J. 35(7):974–994.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shipper F, Manz CC (1992) Employee self-management without formally designated teams: An alternative road to empowerment. Organ. Dynam. 20(3):48–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N, Rivkin JW (2005) Speed and search: Designing organizations for turbulence and complexity. Organ. Sci. 16(2):101–122.Link, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1957) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Soda G, Zaheer A (2012) A network perspective on organizational architecture: Performance effects of the interplay of formal and informal organization. Strategic Management J. 33(6):751–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sosa ME (2008) A structured approach to predicting and managing technical interactions in software development. Res. Engrg. Design 19(1):47–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sosa ME, Eppinger SD, Rowles CM (2004) The misalignment of product architecture and organizational structure in complex product development. Management Sci. 50(12):1674–1689.Link, Google Scholar
• Sosa ME, Eppinger SD, Rowles CM (2007) Are your engineers talking to one another when they should? Harvard Bus. Rev. 85(11):133–142.Google Scholar
• Sosa ME, Gargiulo M, Rowles C (2015) Can informal communication networks disrupt coordination in new product development projects? Organ. Sci. 26(4):1059–1078.Link, Google Scholar
• Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in Action (McGraw Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Tsai W (2000) Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic Management J. 21(9): 925–939.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valve Corporation (2012) Valve Handbook for New Employees, 1st ed. (Valve Press, Bellevue, WA).Google Scholar
• Watts DJ (2004) The “new” science of networks. Annual Rev. Sociology 30(1):243–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (1991) Comparative economic organization: The analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Admin. Sci. Quart. 36(2): 269–296.Crossref, Google Scholar