An Analysis of Organizational Structure in Process Variation

References

• Adler PS, Goldoftas B, Levine DI (1999) Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. 10(1):43–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Alexander C (1964) Notes on the Synthesis of Form (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Baker DD, Cullen JB (1993) Administrative reorganization and configurational context: The contingent effects of age, size, and change in size. Acad. Management J. 36(6):1251–1277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baum JAC, Li SX, Usher JM (2000) Making the next move: How experiential and vicarious learning shape the locations of chains’ acquisitions. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(4):766–801.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bavelas A (1948) A mathematical model for group structures. Human Organ. 7(3):16–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau PM, Schoenherr RA (1971) The Structure of Organisations (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Bloisi W, Cook CW, Hunsaker PL (2007) Management and Organisational Behaviour, 8th ed. (Pearson Education, Harlow, UK).Google Scholar
• Bromiley P (2005) The Behavioral Foundations of Strategic Management, Theories of Strategic Management Series (Blackwell, Malden, MA).Google Scholar
• Browning TR (2016) Design structure matrix extensions and innovations: A survey and new opportunities. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 63(1):27–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen M, Knudsen T (2010) Design of decision-making organizations. Management Sci. 56(1):71–89.Link, Google Scholar
• Clark KB, Fujimoto T (1991) Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Management in the World Auto Industry (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA (2012) Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds. Strategic Management J. 33(6):611–632.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA (2013) An efficient frontier in organization design: Organizational structure as a determinant of exploration and exploitation. Organ. Sci. 24(4):1083–1101.Link, Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1992) Behavioral Theory of the Firm, 2nd ed. (Blackwell, Malden, MA).Google Scholar
• Donaldson L (2001) The Contingency Theory of Organizations, Foundations for Organizational Science (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Donaldson L (2006) The contingency theory of organizational design: Challenges and opportunities. Burton R, Hakonsson DD, Eriksen B, Snow C, eds. Organization Design, Information and Organization Design Series, Vol. 6 (Springer, New York), 19–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eppinger SD (2001) Innovation at the speed of information. Harvard Bus. Rev. 79(1):149–158.Google Scholar
• Façanha L, Resende M (2010) Determinants of hierarchical structure in industrial firms: An empirical study. Econom. Governance 11(3):295–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fujimoto T (2000) Shortening lead time through early problem-solving—A new round of capability-building competition in the auto industry. Jürgens U, ed. New Product Development and Production Networks (Springer, Berlin), 23–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR (1977) Organization Design (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Levinthal D, Ocasio W (2007) Perspective-neo-Carnegie: The Carnegie school’s past, present, and reconstructing for the future. Organ. Sci. 18(3):523–536.Link, Google Scholar
• Gibson CB, Birkinshaw J (2004) The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Acad. Management J. 47(2):209–226.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson LK, Finnie B, Stuart JL (2015) A mathematical model for exploring the evolution of organizational structure. Internat. J. Organ. Anal. 23(1):21–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guetzkow H, Simon HA (1955) The impact of certain communication nets upon organization and performance in task-oriented groups. Management Sci. 1(3–4):233–250.Link, Google Scholar
• Hage J (1965) An axiomatic theory of organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 10(3):289–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannan MT, Freeman J (1984) Structural inertia and organizational change. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 49(2):149–164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haveman HA (1993) Organizational size and change: Diversification in the savings and loan industry after deregulation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 38(1):20–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ioannides YM (2012) Complexity and organizational architecture. Math. Soc. Sci. 64(2):193–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kettinger WJ, Teng JTC, Guha S (1997) Business process change: A study of methodologies, techniques, and tools. MIS Quart. 21(1):55–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kong L, Bhuiyan N, Thomson V (2009) The value of organizational structures. Concurrent Engrg. 17(1):61–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW (1999) Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Leavitt HJ (1951) Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 46(1):38–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Le Mens G, Hannan MT, Pólos L (2015) Age-related structural inertia: A distance-based approach. Organ. Sci. 26(3):756–773.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, Warglien M (1999) Landscape design: Designing for local action in complex worlds. Organ. Sci. 10(3):342–357.Link, Google Scholar
• Mackenzie KD (2013) A working common representation of group and organizational processes. Engrg. Management Res. 2(1):1–20.Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1993) Organizations, 2nd ed. (Blackwell, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Marschak J, Radner R (1972) Economic Theory of Teams (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Miles RE, Snow CC, Meyer AD, Coleman HJ (1978) Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Acad. Management Rev. 3(3):546–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milgrom P, Roberts J (1990) The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, strategy, and organization. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(3):511–528.Google Scholar
• Miller D (1986) Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. Strategic Management J. 7(3):233–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H (1979) The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research, Prentice-Hall International ed. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Mount KR, Reiter S (2002) Computation and Complexity in Economic Behavior and Organization (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Péli GL, Pólos L, Hannan MT (2000) Back to inertia: Theoretical implications of alternative styles of logical formalization. Sociol. Theory 18(2):195–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Raveendran M, Knudsen T (2012) Organization design: The epistemic interdependence perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):419–440.Crossref, 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
• Raisch S, Birkinshaw J, Probst G, Tushman ML (2009) Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organ. Sci. 20(4):685–695.Link, 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
• Sah RK, Stiglitz JE (1985) Human fallibility and economic organization. Amer. Econom. Rev. 75(2):292–297.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
• Simon HA (1976) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organization, 3rd ed. (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Sørensen JB, Stuart TE (2000) Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(1):81–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sparrow P (1999) Strategy and cognition: Understanding the role of management knowledge structures, organizational memory and information overload. Creativity Innovation Management 8(2):140–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Swank O, Visser B (2008) The consequences of endogenizing information for the performance of a sequential decision procedure. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 65(3):667–681.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in Action (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Tushman M, O’Reilly CA III (1996) Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. Calif. Management Rev. 38(4):8–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Romanelli E (1985) Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation. Cummings LL, Staw BM, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 177–222.Google Scholar
• Visser B (2000) Organizational communication structure and performance. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 42(2):231–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber M (1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Yang Q, Yao T, Lu T, Zhang B (2014) An overlapping-based design structure matrix for measuring interaction strength and clustering analysis in product development project. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 61(1):159–170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou YM (2013) Designing for complexity: Using divisions and hierarchy to manage complex tasks. Organ. Sci. 24(2):339–355.Link, Google Scholar