Renewal Through Reorganization: The Value of Inconsistencies Between Formal and Informal Organization

References

• Abrahamson E., Rosenkopf L. Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore. Acad. Management Rev. (1993) 18(3):487–513Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amburgey T. A., Kelley D., Barnett W. P. Resetting the clock: The dynamics of organizational change and failure. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1993) 38:51–73Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baker G. Distortion and risk in optimal incentive contracts. J. Human Resources (2002) 37(4):728–751Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barnard C.The Functions of the Executive (1938) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Baron J. N., Hannan M. T., Burton M. D. Labor pains: Change in organizational models and employee turnover in young, high-tech firms. Amer. J. Sociol. (2001) 106(4):960–1013Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker H. S., Geer B. Latent culture: A note on the theory of latent social roles. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1960) 5(2):304–313Crossref, Google Scholar
• Besanko D., Dranove D., Shanley M.Economics of Strategy (2000) (John Wiley and Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Bhattacharya R., Devinney T. M., Pillutla M. M. A formal model of trust based on outcomes. Acad. Management Rev. (1998) 23(3):459–472Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw J., Gibson C. Building ambidexterity into an organization. MIT Sloan Management Rev. (2004) 45(4):47–55Google Scholar
• Brown S. L., Eisenhardt K. M. The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1997) 42(1):1–34Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruderer E., Singh J. V. Organizational evolution, learning, and selection: A genetic-algorithm-based model. Acad. Management J. (1996) 39(5):1322–1349Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burns T., Stalker G. M.The Management of Innovation (1961) (Tavistock, London) Google Scholar
• Carroll G. R., Harrison J. R. Organizational demography and culture: Insights from a formal model and simulation. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1998) 43(3):637–667Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler A. D.Strategy and Structure (1962) (MIT Press, Cambridge) Google Scholar
• Child J., McGrath R. G. Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an information-intensive economy. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44(6):1135–1148Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen C. M.The Innovator's Dilemma (1997) (HBS Publishing, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Cremer J., Aoki M., Gustaffson B., Williamson O. E. Common knowledge and the coordination of economic activities. The Firm as a Nexus of Treaties (1990) (Sage Publishers, London) Google Scholar
• Drazin R., van de Ven A. H. Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1985) 30(4):514–539Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ebben J., Johnson A. C. Efficiency, flexibility or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms. Strategic Management J. (2005) 26:1249–1259Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eggers J. P., Kaplan S. Cognition and renewal: Comparing CEO and organizational effects on incumbent adaptation to technical change. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):461–477Link, Google Scholar
• Evans P., Doz Y., Laurent A. The dualistic organization. Human Resource Management in International Firms (1989) (Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK) Google Scholar
• Ghemawat P., Costa J. E. The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management J. (1993) 14(8):59–73Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibbons R. Incentives in organizations. J. Econom. Perspectives (1998) 12(4):115–132Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson C. B., Birkinshaw J. The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47(2):209–226Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gulati R. Silo busting—How to execute on the promise of customer focus. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2007) 85(5):98–108Google Scholar
• Hannan M. T., Polos L., Carroll G. R. Cascading organizational change. Organ. Sci. (2003a) 14(5):463–482Link, Google Scholar
• Hannan M. T., Polos L., Carroll G. R. The fog of change: Opacity and asperity in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2003b) 48(3):399–432Crossref, Google Scholar
• He Z.-L., Wong P.-K. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organ. Sci. (2004) 15(4):481–494Link, Google Scholar
• Homans G. C.The Human Group (1950) (Harcourt, Brace & Co., New York) Google Scholar
• Ibarra H. Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement: Determinants of technical and administrative roles. Acad. Management J. (1993) 36(3):471–501Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johansson J. E., Krishnamurthy C., Schlissberg H. Solving the solutions problem. McKinsey Quart. (2003) 3:116–125Google Scholar
• Katila R., Ahuja G. Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. (2002) 45(6):1183–1194Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B., Zander U. What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organ. Sci. (1996) 7(5):502–518Link, Google Scholar
• Kohli A. K., Jaworski B. J. Market orientation—The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. J. Marketing (1990) 54(2):1–18Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D. Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1990) 35(2):342–369Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamont B. T., Williams R. J. Performance during “M-form” reorganization and recovery time: The effects of prior strategy and. Acad. Management J. (1994) 37(1):153–166Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lave C. A., March J. G.An Introduction to Models in the Social Sciences (1993) (University Press of America, Lanham, MD) Google Scholar
• Lawrence P. R., Lorsch J. W.Organizations and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (1967) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Levinthal D. A., March J. G. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. (1993) 14(8):95–112Crossref, Google Scholar
• March J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci.: J. Inst. Management Sci. (1991) 2(1):71–87Crossref, Google Scholar
• March J. G., Simon H. A.Organizations (1958) (Wiley Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Miles M. B., Huberman A. M.Qualitative Data Analysis (1994) (SAGE Publications, London) Google Scholar
• Milgrom P., Roberts J. The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, strategy, and organization. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1990) 80(3):511–528Google Scholar
• Milgrom P., Roberts J.Economics, Organization and Management (1992) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Milgrom P., Roberts J. Complementarities and fit: Strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing. J. Accounting Econom. (1995) 19(2/3):179–208Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller D. Environmental fit versus internal fit. Organ. Sci. (1992) 3(2):159–178Link, Google Scholar
• Miller D., Friesen P.Organizations: A Quantum View (1984) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H. The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strategic Management J. (1990) 11(3):171–195Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadler D. A., Tushman M. L.Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture (1997) (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadler D. A., Tushman M. L. Competing by design. Executive Excellence (1998) 15(8):12–13Google Scholar
• Nickerson J. A., Zenger T. R. Being efficiently fickle: A dynamic theory of organizational choice. Organ. Sci.: J. Inst. Management Sci. (2002) 13(5):547–566Link, Google Scholar
• Oxman J. A., Smith B. D. The limits of structural change. MIT Sloan Management Rev. (2003) 45(1):77–82Google Scholar
• Porter M. E.Competitive Advantage (1985) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Prendergast C. The provision of incentives in firms. J. Econom. Literature (1999) XXXVII:7–63Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P., Singh H., Zollo H. Organizing for innovation: Managing the coordination-autonomy dilemma in technology acquisitions. Acad. Management J. (2006) 49(2):263–280Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivkin J. W., Siggelkow N. Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Sci. (2003) 49(3):290–311Link, Google Scholar
• Romanelli E., Tushman M. L. Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Acad. Management J. (1994) 37(5):1141–1666Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roethlisberger F. J., Dickson W. J.Management and the Worker (1939) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Rust R., Moorman C., Dickson P. Getting return on quality: Revenue expansion, cost reduction, or both? J. Marketing (2002) 66(4):7–24Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scott W.Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems (1998) 4th ed.(Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ) Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N. Change in the presence of fit: The rise, the fall, and the renaissance of liz claiborne. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44(4):838–857Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N. Misperceiving interactions among complements and substitutes: Organizational consequences. Management Sci. (2002) 48(7):900–916Link, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N., Levinthal D. A. Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organ. Sci.: J. Inst. Management Sci. (2003) 14(6):650–669Link, Google Scholar
• Simon H. A.Administrative Behavior (1957) (Macmillan, New York) Google Scholar
• Smith W. K., Tushman M. L. Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organ. Sci. (2005) 16(5):522–536Link, Google Scholar
• Smith-Doerr L., Powell W. W., Swedberg R. Networks and economic life. The Handbook of Economic Sociology (2005) (Russel Sage Foundation, New York) 379–402Google Scholar
• Stinchcombe A., March J. Social structure and organizations. Handbook of Organizations (1965) (Rand McNally, Chicago) Google Scholar
• Thompson J. D.Organizations in Action (1967) (McGraw Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Tripsas M. Technology, identity, and inertia through the lens of “The Digitial Photography Company”. Organ. Sci. (2009) 20(2):441–460Link, Google Scholar
• Tushman M., Romanelli E., Staw B. Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and evolution. Research in Organizational Behavior (1985) 7(JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 171–222Google Scholar
• Tushman M., Smith W., Wood R., Westerman G., O'Reilly C. A. Innovation streams and ambidextrous organizational designs: On building dynamic capabilities. (2004) . Working paperGoogle Scholar
• Tushman M. L., O'Reilly C. A. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Rev. (1996) 38(4):8–30Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wageman R. Interdependence and group effectiveness. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1995) 40(1):145–180Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin R. K.Case Study Research: Design and Methods (1994) (Sage, Newbury Park, CA) Google Scholar