Special Issue: Organizational Design: Emergent by Design: Performance and Transformation at Infosys Technologies

We explore how organizations may be designed to transform themselves even as they continue to perform seamlessly on a day-to-day basis. Our inquiry frame recognizes that organizational designs comprise several elementspeople, technologies, processes, and governance. Our study of an exemplary organization, Infosys Technologies, yields two insights. At Infosys, each design element is seeded with generative properties. As these design elements interact, reinforcing and balancing one another, an overall organizational platform of resources, capabilities, and options emerges. The company draws on this emergent platform to perform in real time even as it transforms itself to adapt to changing environments.

[1]  L. Argote.  Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge , 1999 .

[2]  E. Fama,et al.  Agency Problems and Residual Claims , 1983 .

[3]  B. Pentland.  Building Process Theory with Narrative: from Description to Explanation , 1999 .

[4]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Design Rules: The Power of Modularity , 2000 .

[5]  R. Garud,et al.  TRANSFORMATIVE CAPACITY: CONTINUAL STRUCTURING BY INTERTEMPORAL TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER , 1994 .

[6]  J. March,et al.  Organizational Learning , 2008 .

[7]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[8]  Richard J. Boland,et al.  Managing as Designing , 2004 .

[9]  Raghu Garud,et al.  Vicious and Virtuous Circles in the Management of Knowledge: The Case of Infosys Technologies , 2005, MIS Q..

[10]  Robert A. Burgelman.  Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Coevolutionary Lock-in , 2002 .

[11]  E. Guba,et al.  Lincoln, Yvonna, and Egon Guba, "Postpositivism and the Naturalist Paradigm," pp. 14-46 in Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.* , 1985 .

[12]  P. Nystrom,et al.  Camping on Seesaws: Prescriptions for a Self-Designing Organization , 1976 .

[13]  J. Bruner.  Acts of meaning , 1990 .

[14]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control Unit , 1976 .

[15]  Robert Chia,et al.  On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[16]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Book review:Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Thomas H. Davenport and Laurence Prusak. Harvard Business School Press, 1998. $29.95US. ISBN 0‐87584‐655‐6 , 1998 .

[17]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  Alternative Approaches for Studying Organizational Change , 2005 .

[18]  D. Wegner,et al.  Transactive memory in close relationships. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[19]  Organizations , 1992, Restoration & Management Notes.

[20]  D. Schoen.  The Reflective Practitioner , 1983 .

[21]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[22]  E. Hutchins.  Cognition in the wild , 1995 .

[23]  Vibha Gaba,et al.  Organizing Far from Equilibrium: Nonlinear Change in Organizational Fields , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[24]  TsoukasHaridimos,et al.  On Organizational Becoming , 2002 .

[25]  S. Mezias,et al.  MANAGING DISCONTINUOUS CHANGE: A SIMULATION STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP , 1990 .

[26]  Varun Grover,et al.  Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms , 2003, MIS Q..

[27]  A. Georges L. Romme,et al.  Making a Difference: Organization as Design , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[28]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[29]  C. Ciborra.  The Platform Organization: Recombining Strategies, Structures, and Surprises , 1996 .

[30]  P. Senge.  THE FIFTH DISCIPLINE , 1997 .

[31]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[32]  J. Schumpeter,et al.  Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy , 1943 .

[33]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[34]  A. Young.  Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. , 2001 .

[35]  Araújo,et al.  An Evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[36]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Design Rules: The Power of Modularity Volume 1 , 1999 .

[37]  Joan C. Woodward.  Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice , 1966 .

[38]  K. Weick,et al.  Organizational change and development. , 1999, Annual review of psychology.

[39]  J. Logsdon.  The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA , 1997 .

[40]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[41]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited , 2003 .

[42]  Pankaj Jalote,et al.  CMM in Practice: Processes for Executing Software Projects at Infosys , 1999 .

[43]  Michael A. Cusumano,et al.  Platform leadership , 2002 .

[44]  I. Nonaka,et al.  The Knowledge Creating Company , 2008 .

[45]  A. Gawer,et al.  Platform Leadership How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation , 2002 .

[46]  B. Latour.  Technology is Society Made Durable , 1990 .

[47]  R. Greenwood,et al.  Sedimentation and Transformation in Organizational Change: The Case of Canadian Law Firms , 1996 .

[48]  M. Feldman,et al.  Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change , 2003 .