Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation

References

• Baldwin C. Y., Clark K. B.Design Rules: The Power of Modularity (2000) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bartlett C. A., Ghoshal S., Bartlett C. A., Doz Y., Hedlund G. Managing innovation in the transnational corporation. Managing the Global Firm (1990) (Routledge, London, U.K.) Google Scholar
• Bresnahan T. F., Trajtenberg M. General purpose technologies: "Engines of growth?". J. Econometrics (1995) 65:83–108Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown S. L., Eisenhardt K. M. The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1997) 42:1–34Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burgelman R. A. Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2:239–262Link, Google Scholar
• Carley K. M., Svoboda D. M. Modeling organizational adaptation as a simulated annealing process. Sociological Methods Res. (1996) 25:138–168Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler A. D.Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of Industrial Enterprise (1962) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Christensen C. M.The Innovator's Dilemma (1997) (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
• David P. A. The dynamo and the computer: An historical perspective on the modern productivity paradox. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1990) 80:355–361Google Scholar
• Drazin R., Van de Ven A. H. Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1985) 30:514–539Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. M., Brown S. L. Patching: Restitching business portfolios in dynamic markets. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1999) 77(May–June):72–82Google Scholar
• Eppinger S. D., Whitney D. E., Smith R. P., Gebala D. A. A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development. Res. Engrg. Design (1994) 6:1–13Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ethiraj S., Levinthal D. Modularity and innovation in complex systems. Management Sci.ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Galunic D. C., Eisenhardt K. M. Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44:1229–1250Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G., Levinthal D. Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2000) 45:113–137Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert C. G. Can competing frames co-exist? The paradox of threatened response. (2003) . Working paper, Harvard Business School, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
• Holland J. H.Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence (1975) (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI) Google Scholar
• Kauffman S. A.The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution (1993) (Oxford University Press, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Khermouch G., Byrnes N. Come back to papa. Bus. Week (2001) 73(February 19):42Google Scholar
• Learned E. P., Christensen C. R., Andrews K. R., Guth W. D.Business Policy: Text and Cases (1961) (Irwin, Homewood, IL) Google Scholar
• Levinthal D. A. Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. (1997) 43:934–950Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal D. A., Warglien M. Landscape design: Designing for local action in complex worlds. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10:342–357Link, Google Scholar
• Levitt B., March J. G. Organizational learning. Annual Rev. Soc. (1988) 14:319–340Crossref, Google Scholar
• March J. G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. (1991) 2:71–87Link, Google Scholar
• Meyer A. D., Tsui A. S., Hinnings C. R. Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Acad. Management J. (1993) 36:1175–1195Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milgrom P. R., Roberts J. The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, strategy, and organization. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1990) 80:511–528Google Scholar
• Miller D. Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. Strategic Management J. (1986) 7:233–249Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller D., Friesen P. H.Organizations: A Quantum View (1984) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H.The Structuring of Organizations (1979) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Porter M. E. What is strategy? Harvard Bus. Rev. (1996) 74(6):61–78Google Scholar
• Porter M. E., Siggelkow N. Contextual interactions within activity systems and sustainable competitive advantage. (2002) . Working paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
• Rivkin J. W. Imitation of complex strategies. Management Sci. (2000) 46:824–844Link, Google Scholar
• Rivkin J. W. Reproducing knowledge: Replication without imitation at moderate complexity. Organ. Sci. (2001) 12:274–293Link, Google Scholar
• Rivkin J. W., Siggelkow N. Organizational sticking points on NK-landscapes. Complexity (2002) 7(5):31–43Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivkin J. W., Siggelkow N. Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Sci. (2003) 49:290–311Link, Google Scholar
• Sanchez R. Strategic flexibility in product competition. Strategic Management J. (1995) 16(Summer):135–159Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez R., Mahoney J. T. Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(Winter Special Issue):63–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling M. A. Towards a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Management Rev. (2000) 25:312–334Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schilling M. A., Steensma H. K. The use of modular organizational forms: An industry-level analysis. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44:1149–1168Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schoonhoven C. B., Jelinek M., von Glinow M. A., S. A. Mohrman. Dynamic tension in innovative, high technology firms: Managing rapid technological change through organizational structure. Managing Complexity in High Technology Organizations (1990) (Oxford University Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N. Change in the presence of fit: The rise, the fall, and the renaissance of Liz Claiborne. Acad. Management J. (2001) 44:838–857Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N. Evolution toward fit. Admin. Sci. Quart. (2002) 47:125–159Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N., Levinthal D. A. Adapting to adapt: Sequencing organizational structures. (2003) . Working paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
• Simon H. A. The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. (1962) 106:467–482Google Scholar
• Simon H. A. Applying information technology to organization design. Public Administration Rev. (1973) 33:268–278Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O., Baum J. A. C. Interorganizational complexity and computation. Companion to Organizations (2002) (Blackwell, Oxford, U.K.) Google Scholar
• Stinchcombe A. L., March J. G. Social structure and organization. Handbook of Organizations (1965) (Rand McNally, Chicago, IL) Google Scholar
• Thompson J. D.Organizations in Action (1967) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google 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
• Whittington R., Pettigrew A., Peck S., Fenton E., Conyon M. Change and complementarities in the new competitive landscape: A European panel study, 1992–1996. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10:583–600Link, Google Scholar