Market Segment, Organizational Form, and Information Technology Fit

References

• Abernathy WJ, Utterback JM (1978) Patterns of industrial innovation. Tech. Rev. 80(7):40–47.Google Scholar
• Adner R, Snow D (2010) Old technology responses to new technology threats: Demand heterogeneity and technology retreats. Indust. Corporate Change 19(5):1655–1675.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adner R, Zemsky P (2006) A demand-based perspective on sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management J. 27(3):215–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adner R, Ruiz-Aliseda F, Zemsky P (2016) Specialist versus generalist positioning: Demand heterogeneity, technology scalability and endogenous market segmentation. Strategy Sci. 1(3):184–206.Link, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Gort M (1996) The evolution of markets and entry, exit and survival of firms. Rev. Econom. Statist. 78(3):489–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Gort M (2002) Firm and product life cycles and firm survival. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92(2):184–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Albert D, Kreutzer M, Lechner C (2015) Resolving the paradox of interdependency and strategic renewal in activity systems. Acad. Management Rev. 40(2):210–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Autor DH, Dorn D (2013) The growth of low-skill service jobs and the polarization of the US labor market. Amer. Econom. Rev. 103(5):1553–1597.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Autor DH, Levy F, Murnane RJ (2002) Upstairs, downstairs: Computers and skills on two floors of a large bank. ILR Rev. 55(3):432–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Autor DH, Levy F, Murnane RJ (2003) The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. Quart. J. Econom. 118(4):1279–1333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bartel A, Ichniowski C, Shaw K (2007) How does information technology affect productivity? Plant-level comparisons of product innovation, process improvement, and worker skills. Quart. J. Econom. 122(4):1721–1758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bennett VM (2013) Organization and bargaining: Sales process choice at auto dealerships. Management Sci. 59(9):2003–2018.Link, Google Scholar
• Bennett VM (2020a) Automation and market dominance. Working paper, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.Google Scholar
• Bennett VM (2020b) Changes in persistence of performance over time. Strategic Management J. 41(10):1745–1769.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bennett VM, Hall TA (2020) Software availability and entry. Strategic Management J. 41(5):950–962.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Black SE, Lynch LM (2001) How to compete: The impact of workplace practices and information technology on productivity. Rev. Econom. Statist. 83(3):434–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Draca M, Van Reenen J (2015) Trade induced technical change? The impact of Chinese imports on innovation, IT and productivity. Rev. Econom. Stud. 83(1):87–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Sadun R, Van Reenen J (2012) Americans do IT better: US multinationals and the productivity miracle. Amer. Econom. Rev. 102(1):167–201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloom N, Garicano L, Sadun R, Van Reenen J (2014) The distinct effects of information technology and communication technology on firm organization. Management Sci. 60(12):2859–2885.Link, Google Scholar
• Bresnahan, TF, Brynjolfsson E, Hitt LM (2002) Information technology, workplace organization, and the demand for skilled labor: Firm-level evidence. Quart. J. Econom. 117(1):339–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brews PJ, Tucci CL (2004) Exploring the structural effects of internetworking. Strategic Management J. 25(5):429–451.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Rock D, Syverson C (2018) Artificial intelligence and the modern productivity paradox: A clash of expectations and statistics. Agrawal A, Gans J, Goldfarb A, eds. The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 23–57.Google Scholar
• Cabral L, Mata J (2003) On the evolution of the firm size distribution: Facts and theory. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(4):1075–1090.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caliendo L, Mion G, Opromolla LD, Rossi-Hansberg E (2020) Productivity and organization in Portuguese firms. J. Political Econom. 128(11):4211–4257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler A (1969) Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Christensen CM, Bower JL (1996) Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strategic Management J. 17(3):197–218.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Klepper S (1996) Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: The case of process and product R&D. Rev. Econom. Statist. 78(2):232–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Comstock DE, Scott WR (1977) Technology and the structure of subunits: Distinguishing individual and workgroup effects. Admin. Sci. Quart. 22(2):177–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Figueiredo JM, Silverman BS (2007) Churn, baby, churn: Strategic dynamics among dominant and fringe firms in a segmented industry. Management Sci. 53(4):632–650.Link, 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
• Funding Universe (1999) Ernst & Young company history. Accessed June 30, 2022, http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/ernst-young-history/.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, Hubbard TN (2007) Managerial leverage is limited by the extent of the market: Hierarchies, specialization, and the utilization of lawyers’ human capital. J. Law Econom. 50(1):1–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L, Hubbard TN (2009) Specialization, firms, and markets: The division of labor within and between law firms. J. Law Econom. Organ. 25(2):339–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garicano L, Wu Y (2012) Knowledge, communication, and organizational capabilities. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1382–1397.Link, Google Scholar
• Gavetti G, Menon A, Dowd K (2011) Charlie Merrill and the financial supermarket strategy. Harvard Business Press Case No. 711518-PDF-ENG, Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Henderson RM, Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):9–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• H&R Block (2022) H&R Block company history. Accessed June 30, 2022, https://www.hrblock.com/tax-center/newsroom/around-block/about-us/hr-block-history-innovation/.Google Scholar
• Jelinek M (1977) Technology, organizations, and contingency. Acad. Management Rev. 2(1):17–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan S, Henderson RM (2005) Inertia and incentives: Bridging organizational economics and organizational theory. Organ. Sci. 16(5):509–521.Link, Google Scholar
• Klepper S (1996) Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86(3):562–583.Google Scholar
• Kreps DM, Scheinkman JA (1983) Quantity precommitment and Bertrand competition yield Cournot outcomes. Bell J. Econom. 14(2):326–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leonard-Barton D (1992) Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management J. 13(S1):111–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieberman MB, Montgomery DB (1998) First-mover (dis) advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management J. 19(12):1111–1125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luo H, Yu H (2017) Redfin: Redefine real estate. Harvard Business Press Case No. 718430-PDF-ENG, Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Mahr F, Kretschmer T (2010) Complementarities between IT and organizational structure: The role of corporate exploration and exploitation. Working paper, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, München, Germany.Google Scholar
• Maister DH (2012) Managing the Professional Service Firm (Simon and Schuster, New York).Google Scholar
• Mayer KJ, Somaya D, Williamson IO (2012) Firm-specific, industry-specific, and occupational human capital and the sourcing of knowledge work. Organ. Sci. 23(5):1311–1329.Link, Google Scholar
• National Center for O*NET Development (2021) Work context—importance of repeating same tasks. O*NET OnLine. Accessed November 14, 2022, https://www.onetonline.org/help/online/scales.Google Scholar
• Nickerson JAS, Zenger TR (2004) A knowledge-based theory of the firm-The problem-solving perspective. Organ. Sci. 15(6):617–632.Link, 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
• Powell TC, Dent-Micallef A (1997) Information technology as competitive advantage: The role of human, business, and technology resources. Strategic Management J. 18(5):375–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter J (1934) The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Routledge, Abingdon, UK).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
• Shane S (2001) Technology regimes and new firm formation. Management Sci. 47(9):1173–1190.Link, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N (2001) Change in the presence of fit: The rise, the fall, and the renaissance of Liz Claiborne. Acad. Management J. 44(4):838–857.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N (2002) Evolution toward fit. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47(1):125–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1955) On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika 42(3–4):425–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA, Bonini CP (1958) The size distribution of business firms. Amer. Econom. Rev. 48(4):607–617.Google Scholar
• Tripsas M (1997) Unraveling the process of creative destruction: Complementary assets and incumbent survival in the typesetter industry. Strategic Management J. 18(S1):119–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021) Occupational employment and wage statistics tables. Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics. Accessed November 14, 2022, https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm.Google Scholar
• Vroom G, Gimeno J (2007) Ownership form, managerial incentives, and the intensity of rivalry. Acad. Management J. 50(4):901–922.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu B, Wan Z, Levinthal DA (2014) Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices. Strategic Management J. 35(9):1257–1278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu Y (2015) Organizational structure and product choice in knowledge-intensive firms. Management Sci. 61(8):1830–1848.Link, Google Scholar
• Yule GU (1925) II. A mathematical theory of evolution, based on the conclusions of Dr. JC Willis, FR S. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. B Containing Papers Biological Character 213(402–410):21–87.Crossref, Google Scholar