Comanaging in Multisubsidiary Firms: The Role of Complementary and Substitutive Interdependencies

References

• Aggarwal VA, Wu B (2015) Organizational constraints to adaptation: Intrafirm asymmetry in the locus of coordination. Organ. Sci. 26(1):218–238.Link, Google Scholar
• Aggarwal VA, Posen HE, Workiewicz M (2017) Adaptive capacity to technological change: A microfoundational approach. Strategic Management J. 38(6):1212–1231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Tirole J (1997) Formal and real authority in organizations. J. Political Econom. 105(1):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Albert D (2024) What do you mean by organizational structure? Acknowledging and harmonizing differences and commonalities in three prominent perspectives. J. Organ. Design 13(1):1–11.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almeida H, Park SY, Subrahmanyam MG, Wolfenzon D (2011) The structure and formation of business groups: Evidence from Korean chaebols. J. Financial Econom. 99(2):447–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aoki M (1990) Toward an economic model of the Japanese firm. J. Econom. Literature 28(1):1–27.Google Scholar
• Argyres N (1996) Capabilities, technological diversification and divisionalization. Strategic Management J. 17(5):395–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barker J, Tjosvold D, Andrews IR (1988) Conflict approaches of effective and ineffective project managers: A field study in a matrix organization. J. Management Stud. 25(2):167–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barklie G (2022) Where do the world’s top companies have subsidiaries? Investment Monitor (March 14), https://www.investmentmonitor.ai/features/where-do-the-worlds-top-companies-have-subsidiaries/.Google Scholar
• Bartlett CA (1993) ABB’s relays business: Building and managing a global matrix. Harvard Business School Case No. 394-016, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Baumann O, Eggers JP, Stieglitz N (2019) Colleagues and competitors: How internal social comparisons shape organizational search and adaptation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 64(2):275–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belenzon S, Berkovitz T, Rios LA (2013) Capital markets and firm organization: How financial development shapes European corporate groups. Management Sci. 59(6):1326–1343.Link, Google Scholar
• Bethel J, Liebeskind J (1998) Diversification and the legal organization of the firm. Organ. Sci. 9(1):49–67.Link, Google Scholar
• Bhalla V, Gandarilla D, Watkins M (2022) How to make your matrix organization really work. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 64(1):1–6.Google Scholar
• Bouquet C, Birkinshaw J (2008) Weight versus voice: How foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters. Acad. Management J. 51(3):577–601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bower JL (1970) Managing the Resource Allocation Process: A Study of Corporate Planning and Investment (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Brown SL, Eisenhardt KM (1997) The art of continuous change. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(1):1–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Buchuk D, Larrain B, Muñoz F, Urzúa I F (2014) The internal capital markets of business groups: Evidence from intra-group loans. J. Financial Econom. 112(2):190–212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burton RM, Obel B (1984) Designing Efficient Organizations: Modelling and Experimentation (North-Holland, Amsterdam).Google Scholar
• Burton RM, Obel B, Haakonsson DD (2020) Organizational Design: A Step-by-Step Approach (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler AD (1962) Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Chandler AD (1977) The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Cleland DI, King WR (1983) Project Management Handbook, 3rd ed. (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York).Google Scholar
• Collis DJ, Montgomery CA (2005) Corporate Strategy: A Resource-Based Approach, 2nd ed. (McGraw-Hill, Boston).Google Scholar
• Cowling K, Sugden R (1987) Transnational Monopoly Capitalism (Wheatsheaf Books, Brighton, UK).Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA, Eggers JP (2013) Organizational decision making: An information aggregation view. Management Sci. 59(10):2257–2277.Link, Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Darr ED, Argote L, Epple D (1995) The acquisition, transfer, and depreciation of knowledge in service organizations: Productivity in franchises. Management Sci. 41(11):1750–1762.Link, Google Scholar
• Davis S, Lawrence PR (1977) Matrix (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Denis H (1986) Matrix structures, quality of working life, and engineering productivity. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management EM-33(3):148–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dess GG, Beard DW (1984) Dimension of organizational task environments. Admin. Sci. Quart. 29(1):52–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobrajska M, Billinger S, Karim S (2015) Delegation within hierarchies: How information processing and knowledge characteristics influence the allocation of formal and real decision authority. Organ. Sci. 26(3):687–704.Link, Google Scholar
• Dyas GR, Thanheiser H (1976) The Emerging European Enterprise (Macmillan, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ennen E, Richter A (2010) The whole is more than the sum of its parts—Or is it? A review of the empirical literature on complementarities in organizations. J. Management 36(1):207–233.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
• Faccio M, Lang LHP (2002) The ultimate ownership of Western European corporations. J. Financial Econom. 65(3):365–395.Crossref, 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
• Fayol H (1949) General and Industrial Administration (Pitman, New York).Google Scholar
• Feinberg RM (1985) “Sales-at-risk”: A test of the mutual forbearance theory of conglomerate behavior. J. Bus. 58(2):225–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ford RC, Randolph WA (1992) Cross-functional structures: A review and integration of matrix organization and project management. J. Management 18(2):267–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fredrickson JW, Mitchell TR (1984) Strategic decision processes: Comprehensiveness and performance in an industry with an unstable environment. Acad. Management J. 27(2):399–423.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR (1974) Organization design: An information processing view. Interfaces 4(3):28–36.Link, Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR (1977) Organization Design (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Galbraith JR (2009) Designing Matrix Organizations That Actually Work: How IBM, Procter & Gamble and Others Design for Success (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Gallo PJ, Burton R (2012) Sequencing organizational change for post-shock adaptation: A simulation model. J. Organ. Design 1(3):37–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galunic DC, Eisenhardt KM (2001) Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. Acad. Management J. 44(6):1229–1249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L (2000) Hierarchies and the organization of knowledge in production. J. Political Econom. 108(5):874–904.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L, Wu Y (2012) Knowledge, communication, and organizational capabilities. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1382–1397.Link, Google Scholar
• Gimeno J, Woo CY (1996) Hypercompetition in a multimarket environment: The role of strategic similarity and multimarket contact in competitive de-escalation. Organ. Sci. 7(3):322–341.Link, Google Scholar
• Gligor DM, Esmark CL, Holcomb MC (2015) Performance outcomes of supply chain agility: When should you be agile? J. Oper. Management 33–34(1):71–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goold M, Campbell A (1987) Strategies and Styles: The Role of the Centre in Managing Diversified Corporations (Basil Blackwell Oxford, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Goold M, Campbell A (2002) Designing Effective Organizations: How to Create Structured Networks (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Grant RM (2003) Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: Evidence from the oil majors. Strategic Management J. 24(6):491–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenwood R, Miller D (2010) Tackling design anew: Getting back to the heart of organizational theory. Acad. Management Perspect. 24(4):78–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guadalupe M, Li H, Wulf J (2014) Who lives in the C-suite? Organizational structure and the division of labor in top management. Management Sci. 60(4):824–844.Link, Google Scholar
• Hansmann H (2000) The Ownership of Enterprise (Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Harris M, Raviv A (2002) Organization design. Management Sci. 48(7):852–865.Link, Google Scholar
• Hart O, Holmstrom B (2010) A theory of firm scope. Quart. J. Econom. 125(2):483–513.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haveman HA, Nonnemaker L (2000) Competition in multiple geographic markets: The impact on growth and market entry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(2):232–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE, Karim S (2014) Fit between organization design and organizational routines. J. Organ. Design 3(2):18–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson R, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation—The reconfiguration of technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):9–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill CWL, Hitt MA, Hoskisson RE (1992) Cooperative versus competitive structures in related and unrelated diversified firms. Organ. Sci. 3(4):501–521.Link, Google Scholar
• Jaques E (1990) In praise of hierarchy. Harvard Bus. Rev. 68(1):127–133.Google Scholar
• Jayachandran S, Gimeno J, Varadarajan PR (1999) The theory of multimarket competition: A synthesis and implications for marketing strategy. J. Marketing 63(3):49–66.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jerkovsky W (1983) Functional management in matrix organizations. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management EM-30(2):89–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joseph J, Gaba V (2020) Organizational structure, information processing, and decision-making: A retrospective and road map for research. Acad. Management Ann. 14(1):267–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joseph J, Ocasio W (2012) Architecture, attention, and adaptation in the multibusiness firm: General Electric from 1951 to 2001. Strategic Management J. 33(6):633–660.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joseph J, Sengul M (2025) Organization design: Current insights and future research directions. J. Management 51(1):249–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joyce WF (1986) Matrix organization: A social experiment. Acad. Management J. 29(3):536–561.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S (2006) Modularity in organizational structure: The reconfiguration of internally developed and acquired business units. Strategic Management J. 27(9):799–823.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S (2009) Business unit reorganization and innovation in new product markets. Management Sci. 55(7):1237–1254.Link, Google Scholar
• Karim S, Mitchell W (2000) Path-dependent and path-breaking change: Reconfiguring business resources following acquisitions in the U.S. medical sector, 1978–1995. Strategic Management J. 21(10–11):1061–1081.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S, Carroll TN, Long CP (2016) Delaying change: Examining how industry and managerial turbulence impact structural realignment. Acad. Management J. 59(3):791–817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karim S, Lee CH, Hoehn‐Weiss MN (2023) Task bottlenecks and resource bottlenecks: A holistic examination of task systems through an organization design lens. Strategic Management J. 44(8):1839–1878.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz R, Allen TJ (1985) Project performance and the locus of influence in the R&D matrix. Acad. Management J. 28(1):67–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kayo EK, Kimura H (2011) Hierarchical determinants of capital structure. J. Banking Finance 35(2):358–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein PG, Saidenberg MR (2010) Organizational structure and the diversification discount: Evidence from commercial banking. J. Indust. Econom. 58(1):127–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klepper S, Graddy E (1990) The evolution of new industries and the determinants of market structure. RAND J. Econom. 21(1):27–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ. Sci. 3(3):383–397.Link, Google Scholar
• Larson EW, Gobeli D (1987) Matrix management: Contradictions and insights. California Management Rev. 29(4):126–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW (1967) Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (Division of Research, Harvard Business School, Boston).Google Scholar
• Lee J, Bansal P (2024) Sweeping it under the rug: Positioning and managing pollution-intensive activities in organizational hierarchies. Strategic Management J. 45(6):1151–1179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lemelin A (1982) Relatedness in the patterns of interindustry diversification. Rev. Econom. Statist. 64(4):646–657.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, Workiewicz M (2018) When two bosses are better than one: Nearly decomposable systems and organizational adaptation. Organ. Sci. 29(2):207–224.Link, Google Scholar
• Lyandres E (2006) Capital structure and interaction among firms in output markets: Theory and evidence. J. Bus. 79(5):2381–2421.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Marshak J, Radner R (1972) Economic Theory of Teams (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H (1979) The Structuring of Organizations (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H, Waters JA (1985) Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management J. 6(3):257–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Monteiro LF, Arvidsson N, Birkinshaw J (2008) Knowledge flows within multinational corporations: Explaining subsidiary isolation and its performance implications. Organ. Sci. 19(1):90–107.Link, Google Scholar
• Morris PW, Pinto JK, Söderlund J (2011) The Oxford Handbook of Project Management (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadkarni S, Barr PS (2008) Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: An integrated view. Strategic Management J. 29(13):1395–1427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadler DA, Tushman ML (1997) Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Obloj T, Sengul M (2025) Ownership as a bundle of rights: Antecedents of the wedge between control and cash-flow rights within firms. Strategy Sci. 10(2):109–127.Link, Google Scholar
• Pfeffer J, Salancik GR (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Pollach I (2022) The diffusion of management fads: A popularization perspective. J. Management History 28(2):284–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter ME (1984) Strategic interaction: Some lessons from industry histories for theory and antitrust policy. Lamb RB, ed. Competitive Strategic Management (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), 415–445.Google Scholar
• Porter M, Siggelkow N (2008) Contextuality within activity systems and sustainability of competitive advantage. Acad. Management Perspect. 22(2):34–56.Crossref, 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 (2012) A future for the science of organization design. J. Organ. Design 1(1):18–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P (2018) The Microstructure of Organizations (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Vanneste B (2016) Corporate Strategy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Alexy O, Reitzig M (2014) What’s “new” about new forms of organizing? Acad. Management Rev. 39(2):162–180.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
• Rahmandad H (2019) Interdependence, complementarity, and ruggedness of performance landscapes. Strategy Sci. 4(3):234–249.Link, Google Scholar
• Raveendran M (2020) Seeds of change: How current structure shapes the type and timing of reorganizations. Strategic Management J. 41(1):27–54.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
• Roberts GS, Viscione JA (1981) Captive finance subsidiaries and the M-form hypothesis. Bell J. Econom. 12(1):285–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sengul M, Gimeno J (2013) Constrained delegation: Limiting subsidiaries’ decision rights and resources in firms that compete across multiple industries. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(3):420–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N (2002) Misperceiving interactions among complements and substitutes: Organizational consequences. Management Sci. 48(7):900–916.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 (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 106(6):467–482.Google Scholar
• Sohn M-W (2001) Distance and cosine measures of niche overlap. Soc. Networks 23(2):141–165.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sydow J, Lindkvist L, DeFillippi R (2004) Project-based organizations, embeddedness and repositories of knowledge: Editorial. Organ. Stud. 25(9):1475–1489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sytch M, Wohlgezogen F, Zajac EJ (2018) Collaborative by design? How matrix organizations see/do alliances. Organ. Sci. 29(6):1130–1148.Link, Google Scholar
• Szulanski G (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management J. 17(S2):27–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor FW (1911) The Principles of Scientific Management (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
• Taylor A, Helfat CE (2009) Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organ. Sci. 20(4):718–739.Link, Google Scholar
• Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory (Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ).Google Scholar
• Turner SG, Utley DR, Westbrook JD (1998) Project managers and functional managers: A case study of job satisfaction in a matrix organization. Project Management J. 29(3):11–19.Crossref, 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
• van Zandt T (1999) Real-time decentralized information processing as a model of organizations with boundedly rational agents. Rev. Econom. Stud. 66(3):633–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Verboven F (1998) Localized competition, multimarket operation and collusive behavior. Internat. Econom. Rev. 39(2):371–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williamson OE (1975) Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Yu T, Cannella AA Jr (2013) A comprehensive review of multimarket competition research. J. Management 39(1):76–109.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zenger TR, Felin T, Bigelow L (2011) Theories of the firm–market boundary. Acad. Management Ann. 5(1):89–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou YM (2011) Synergy, coordination costs, and diversification choices. Strategic Management J. 32(6):624–639.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