Organizational Constraints to Adaptation: Intrafirm Asymmetry in the Locus of Coordination

被引:37
作者
Aggarwal, Vikas A. [1 ]
Wu, Brian [2 ]
机构
[1] INSEAD, F-77305 Fontainebleau, France
[2] Univ Michigan, Ross Sch Business, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
demand shock; coordination; adaptation; organization design; interdependence; dynamic environments; defense industry; RESEARCH-AND-DEVELOPMENT; VALUE CREATION; PRODUCT; CAPABILITIES; TECHNOLOGY; INNOVATION; COSTS; DIVERSIFICATION; PERFORMANCE; STRATEGY;
D O I
10.1287/orsc.2014.0929
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
We assemble a panel data set of firms in the U.S. defense industry between 1996 and 2006 to examine the drivers of heterogeneous incumbent firm adaptation following the industry-wide demand shock of September 11, 2001. This shock entailed not only an increase in aggregate demand but, more importantly, a shift in the relative attractiveness of individual product areas, resulting in the need for firms to reshuffle their product portfolios in response to changing demand conditions. The exogenous nature of the shock allows us to empirically identify the effect of preshock interdependence structures on postshock adaptation outcomes. We find that the locus of coordination inside a firm can explain differential postshock adaptation performance: because interdependencies spanning organizational boundaries are more difficult to manage than those contained within such boundaries, coordination across product areas creates greater adaptation challenges compared with coordination within product areas. We further investigate the moderating effects of product complementarity and organizational grouping, finding results consistent with our hypothesized mechanisms. As one of the first studies to empirically link a firm's locus of coordination with its adaptation performance, this study contributes to our understanding of the role of interdependence and organization design in dynamic environments.
引用
收藏
页码:218 / 238
页数:21
相关论文
共 91 条
[11]   Intrafirm competition and charter evolution in the multibusiness firm [J].
Birkinshaw, J ;
Lingblad, M .
ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2005, 16 (06) :674-686
[12]   How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention? [J].
Chatterji, Aaron K. ;
Fabrizio, Kira .
ORGANIZATION SCIENCE, 2012, 23 (04) :971-987
[13]  
Christensen C.M., 2016, The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail
[14]  
Christensen CM, 1996, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V17, P197, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199603)17:3<197::AID-SMJ804>3.0.CO
[15]  
2-U
[16]  
Colfer L, 2010, 10058 HBS
[17]  
Dalton D.R., 1980, The Academy of Management Review, V5, P49, DOI DOI 10.5465/AMR.1980.4288881
[18]   Tight-loose coupling with customers: The enactment of customer orientation [J].
Danneels, E .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2003, 24 (06) :559-576
[19]   INCENTIVES, DOWNSIZING, AND VALUE CREATION AT GENERAL DYNAMICS [J].
DIAL, J ;
MURPHY, KJ .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1995, 37 (03) :261-314
[20]   LIMITATIONS TO INTERORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION: THE PARADOX OF CORPORATE VENTURE CAPITAL [J].
Dushnitsky, Gary ;
Shaver, J. Myles .
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 2009, 30 (10) :1045-1064