The dominant logic: A new linkage between diversity and performance

Current research offers alternative explanations to the “linkage” between the pattern of diversification and performance. At least four streams of research can be identified. None of these can be considered to be a reliable, predictive theory of successful diversification. They are, at best, partial explanations. The purpose of this paper is to propose an additional “linkage,” conceptual at this stage, that might help our understanding of the crucial connection between diversity and performance. The conceptual argument is intented as a “supplement” to the current lines of research, rather than as an alternative explanation.

[1]  B. Skinner,et al.  Science and human behavior , 1953 .

[2]  Shirley Terreberry.  The Evolution of Organizational Environments , 1968 .

[3]  Cynthia A. Montgomery,et al.  Diversification, market structure, and firm performance : an extension of Rumelt's model , 1979 .

[4]  P. Hoffman.  The paramorphic representation of clinical judgment. , 1960, Psychological bulletin.

[5]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[6]  J. Baron,et al.  An analysis of the word-superiority effect☆ , 1973 .

[7]  Y. Suzuki.  The Strategy and structure of top 100 Japanese industrial enterprises 1950–1970 , 1980 .

[8]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgment. , 1971 .

[9]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[10]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Managerial Response to Changing Environments: Perspectives on Problem Sensing from Social Cognition. , 1982 .

[11]  R. Bettis.  Strategic management in the multibusiness firm : implementing the portfolio concept , 1979 .

[12]  L. Vogel,et al.  Strategy and Structure , 1986 .

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

[14]  D. Hambrick.  Environmental scanning and organizational strategy , 1982 .

[15]  B. Hedberg.  How Organizations Learn and Unlearn , 1981 .

[16]  Anne Sigismund Huff,et al.  Industry influences on strategy reformulation , 1982 .

[17]  V. Mahajan,et al.  Risk/Return Performance of Diversified Firms , 1985 .

[18]  A. Athos,et al.  The Art of Japanese Management , 1982 .

[19]  P. Slovic.  Analyzing the expert judge: A descriptive study of a stockbroker's decision process. , 1969 .

[20]  Charles W. Hofer,et al.  Strategy formulation : analytical concepts , 1978 .

[21]  W. Balke.  An Alternate Approach to Labor-Management Relations. , 1973 .

[22]  A. D. D. Groot.  Thought and Choice in Chess , 1978 .

[23]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[24]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[25]  Charles K. Warriner,et al.  Organizations and their environments : essays in the sociology of organizations , 1985 .

[26]  Jack R. Borsting,et al.  Decision-Making at the Top , 1982 .

[27]  K. Weick.  The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[28]  H. Simon,et al.  Information Processing Models of Cognition , 1979 .

[29]  K. Cameron,et al.  Coffin nails and corporate strategies , 1982 .

[30]  Graham Allison,et al.  Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis , 1972 .

[31]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Behavioral Decision Theory , 1977 .