Designing for Complexity: Using Divisions and Hierarchy to Manage Complex Tasks

References

• Adler PS. (1995) Interdepartmental interdependence and coordination: The case of the design/manufacturing interface. Organ. Sci. 6 (2):147–167.Link, Google Scholar
• Akerlof GA, Kranton RE. (2005) Identity and the economics of organizations. J. Econom. Perspect. 19 (1):9–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aldrich H. (1979) Organizations and Environments (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Argyres NS. (1995) Technology strategy, governance structure, and interdivisional coordination. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 28 (3):337–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres N. (1996) Capabilities, technological diversification, and divisionalization. Strategic Management J. 17 (5):395–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argyres N, Bigelow L. (2010) Innovation, modularity, and vertical deintegration: Evidence from the early U.S. auto industry. Organ. Sci. 21 (4):842–853.Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ. (1974) The Limits of Organization (W. W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY. (2008) Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms: A synthesis. Indust. Corporate Change 17 (1):155–196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY, Clark KB. (2000) Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY, Clark KB. (2006) Between “knowledge” and “the economy”: Notes on the scientific study of designs. , Kahin B, Foray D, eds. Advancing Knowledge and the Knowledge Economy (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 299–328.Google Scholar
• BEA (U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis) (2011) Gross-domestic-product-(GDP)-by-industry data. . Report, BEA, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Becker GS, Murphy KM. (1992) The division of labor, coordination costs, and knowledge. Quart. J. Econom. 107 (4):1137–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau PM. (1970) A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 35 (2):201–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brass DJ. (1984) Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. Admin. Sci. Quart. 29 (4):518–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burton RM, Obel B. (1980) A computer simulation test of the M-form hypothesis. Admin. Sci. Quart. 25 (3):457–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler ADJ. (1962) Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Chang SJ. (1996) An evolutionary perspective on diversification and corporate restructuring: Entry, exit, and economic performance during 1981–89. Strategic Management J. 17 (8):587–611.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Child J, Mansfield R. (1972) Technology, size, and organization structure. Sociology 6 (3):369–393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crémer J, Garicano L, Prat A. (2007) Language and the theory of the firm. Quart. J. Econom. 122 (1):373–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cusumano MA, Selby RW. (1995) Microsoft Secrets: How the World's Most Powerful Software Company Creates Technology, Shapes Markets and Manages People (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Danon L, Diaz-Guilera A, Duch J, Arenas A. (2005) Comparing community structure identification. J. Statist. Mech.: Theory Experiment P09008 :1–10.Google Scholar
• Dewar R, Hage J. (1978) Size, technology, complexity, and structural differentiation: Toward a theoretical synthesis. Admin. Sci. Quart. 23 (1):111–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Donaldson L. (2001) The Contingency Theory of Organizations (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dougherty D. (1992) Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organ. Sci. 3 (2):179–202.Link, Google Scholar
• Economist (1990) The incredible shrinking company. (December 15):65.Google Scholar
• Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D. (2004a) 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
• Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D. (2004b) Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Sci. 50 (2):159–173.Link, Google Scholar
• Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D, Roy RR. (2008) The dual role of modularity: Innovation and imitation. Management Sci. 54 (5):939–955.Link, Google Scholar
• Fan JPH, Lang LHP. (2000) The measurement of relatedness: An application to corporate diversification. J. Bus. 73 (4): 629–660.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Farjoun M. (1998) The independent and joint effects of the skill and physical bases of relatedness in diversification. Strategic Management J. 19 (7):611–630.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Sorenson O. (2001) The dangers of modularity. Harvard Bus. Rev. 79 (8):20–21.Google Scholar
• Fligstein N. (1985) The spread of the multidivisional form among large firms, 1919–1979. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 50 (3):377–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR. (1973) Designing Complex Organizations (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR. (1977) Organization Design (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR. (1993) Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR, Lawler EE. (1993) Organizing for the Future (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR, Nathanson DA. (1978) Strategy Implementation: The Role of Structure and Process (West Publishing, St. Paul, MN).Google Scholar
• Geanakoplos J, Milgrom P. (1991) A theory of hierarchies based on limited managerial attention. J. Japanese Internat. Econom. 5 (3):205–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghemawat P, Levinthal D. (2008) Choice interactions and business strategy. Management Sci. 54 (9):1638–1651.Link, Google Scholar
• Ghoshal S, Nohria N. (1989) Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management J. 10 (4):323–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grinyer PH, Yasai-Ardekani M, Al-Bazzaz S. (1980) Strategy, structure, the environment, and financial performance in 48 United Kingdom companies. Acad. Management J. 23 (2):193–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guimerà R, Amaral LAN. (2005) Functional cartography of complex metabolic networks. Nature 433 (7028):895–900.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harris M, Raviv A. (2002) Organization design. Management Sci. 48 (7):852–865.Link, Google Scholar
• Hart O, Moore J. (2005) On the design of hierarchies: Coordination versus specialization. J. Political Econom. 113 (4):675–702.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G. (2006) Do modular products lead to modular organizations? Strategic Management J. 27 (6):501–518.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holmstrom BR, Tirole J. (1989) The theory of the firm. , Schmalensee R, Willig R, eds. Handbook of Industrial Organization (Elsevier Science, Amsterdam), 61–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hortaçsu A, Syverson C. (2009) Why do firms own production chains?. . U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies Paper CES 09-31, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Hoskisson RE. (1987) Multidivisional structure and performance: The contingency of diversification strategy. Acad. Management J. 30 (4):625–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kauffman SA. (1993) The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knuth DE. (1997) The Art of Computer Programming, 3rd ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U. (1996) What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organ. Sci. 7 (5):502–518.Link, Google Scholar
• Langlois RN. (2002) Modularity in technology and organization. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 49 (1):19–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW. (1967) Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 12 (1):1–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leiblein MJ, Miller DJ. (2003) An empirical examination of transaction- and firm-level influences on the vertical boundaries of the firm. Strategic Management J. 24 (9):839–859.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lemelin A. (1982) Relatedness in the patterns of interindustry diversification. Rev. Econom. Statist. 64 (4):646–657.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lenox MJ, Rockart SF, Lewin AY. (2006) Interdependency, competition, and the distribution of firm and industry profits. Management Sci. 52 (5):757–772.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA. (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43 (7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• LexisNexis (2005) Content inclusion criteria. . Accessed January 1, 2005, http://www.corporateaffiliations.com/nonsu/aboutContentInclusion.asp.Google Scholar
• MacDuffie JP. (2006) Modularity and the automobile: What happened when the concept hit the road. . Working paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• March JG. (1994) Primer on Decision Making: How Decisions Happen (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA. (1958) Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Marengo L, Dosi G. (2005) Division of labor, organizational coordination and market mechanisms in collective problem-solving. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 58 (2):303–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marschak J, Radner R. (1972) Economic Theory of Teams (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Matsusaka JG. (1993) Takeover motives during the conglomerate merger wave. RAND J. Econom. 24 (3):357–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McKelvey B. (1999) Avoiding complexity catastrophe in coevolutionary pockets: Strategies for rugged landscapes. Organ. Sci. 10 (3):294–321.Link, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H. (1979) The Structuring of Organizations (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Monteverde K. (1995) Technical dialog as an incentive for vertical integration in the semiconductor industry. Management Sci. 41 (10):1624–1638.Link, Google Scholar
• Nadler DA, Tushman ML. (1997) Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Neter J, Wasserman W, Kutner M. (2004) Applied Linear Statistical Models, 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill Irwin, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Newman MEJ, Girvan M. (2004) Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E 69 (2):026113.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
• Orton JD, Weick KE. (1990) Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Acad. Management Rev. 15 (2):203–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parnas DL. (1972) On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Comm. ACM 15 (12):1053–1058.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pennings JM. (1992) Structural contingency theory: A reappraisal. , Staw BM, Cummings LL, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 14 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 267–309.Google Scholar
• Porter ME. (1985) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Porter M. (1996) What is strategy? Harvard Bus. Rev. 76 (6):61–78.Google Scholar
• Puranam P. (2001) A knowledge based perspective on the internal boundaries of the firm: The case of technology grafting acquisitions. . Working paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• Radner R. (1993) The organization of decentralized information processing. Econometrica 61 (5):1109–1146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rajan RG, Wulf J. (2006) The flattening firm: Evidence from panel data on the changing nature of corporate hierarchies. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88 (4):759–773.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rajan RG, Zingales L. (2001) The firm as a dedicated hierarchy: A theory of the origins and growth of firms. Quart. J. Econom. 116 (3):805–851.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
• Rivkin JW, Siggelkow N. (2007) Patterned interactions in complex systems: Implications for exploration. Management Sci. 53 (7):1068–1085.Link, Google Scholar
• Robins J, Wiersema MF. (1995) A resource-based approach to the multibusiness firm: Empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance. Strategic Management J. 16 (4):277–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothwell G. (1996) Organizational structure and expected output at nuclear power plants. Rev. Econom. Statist. 78 (3):482–488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rumelt RP. (1974) Strategy, Structure, and Economic Performance (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Rumelt RP. (1982) Diversification strategy and profitability. Strategic Management J. 3 (4):359–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez R, Mahoney JT. (1996) Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic Management J. 17 (Special issue):63–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling MA, Steensma HK. (2001) The use of modular organizational forms: An industry-level analysis. Acad. Management J. 44 (6):1149–1168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schoar A. (2002) Effects of corporate diversification on productivity. J. Finance 57 (6):2379–2403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scott WR, Davis GF. (2006) Organizations and Organizing: Rational, Natural, and Open System Perspectives, 6th ed. (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).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
• Siggelkow N, Rivkin JW. (2006) When exploration backfires: Unintended consequences of multilevel organizational search. Acad. Management J. 49 (4):779–795.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA. (1947) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Simon HA. (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart. J. Econom. 69 (1):99–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA. (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 106 (6):467–482.Google Scholar
• Simon HA. (1991) Organizations and markets. J. Econom. Perspect. 5 (2):25–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sturgeon TJ. (2002) Modular production networks: A new American model of industrial organization. Indust. Corporate Change 11 (3):451–496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutherland JW. (1980) A quasi-empirical mapping of optimal scale of enterprise. Management Sci. 26 (10):963–981.Link, Google Scholar
• Thompson JD. (1967) Organizations in Action (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Nadler DA. (1978) Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Acad. Management Rev. 3 (3):613–624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ulrich KT, Eppinger SD. (1999) Product Design and Development, 2nd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Van Zandt T. (2003) Real-time hierarchical resource allocation. . Working paper, INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France.Google Scholar
• Villalonga B. (2004) Diversification discount or premium? New evidence from the business information tracking series. J. Finance 59 (2):475–502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Zhang J. (2007) In search of the biological significance of modular structures in protein networks. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3 (6):1011–1021.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wheelwright SC, Clark KB. (1992) Revolutionizing Product Development: Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. (1967) Hierarchical control and optimum firm size. J. Political Econom. 75 (2):123–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE. (1975) Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Yayavaram S, Ahuja G. (2008) Technological search and decomposability in knowledge structures: Impact on invention utility and knowledge-base malleability. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53 (2): 333–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zannetos ZS. (1965) On the theory of divisional structures: Some aspects of centralization and decentralization of control and decision making. Management Sci. 12 (4):B-49–B-68.Link, Google Scholar
• Zellner A. (1962) An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regression equations and tests for aggregation bias. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 57 (298):348–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zenger TR, Hesterly WS. (1997) The disaggregation of corporations: Selective intervention, high-powered incentives, and molecular units. Organ. Sci. 8 (3):209–222.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang Z, Zhang J. (2009) A big world inside small-world networks. PLoS ONE 4 (5):e5686.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou YM. (2011) Synergy, coordination costs, and diversification choices. Strategic Management J. 32 (6):624–639.Crossref, Google Scholar