The UnDerexplOreD rOle Of ManagIng InTerDepenDenCIes fIT In OrganIza TIOn DesIgn anD perfOrManCe

We argue that research on interdependencies fit is an underexplored variable in strategy and organization research and is the missing variable that differentiates the performance of "built to last" organizations from the rest. Interdependencies fit relates to how well activities and processes within the organization or between the organization and its environment mutually reinforce one another. We suggest that the major reason underlying variation in firm performance may be rooted in differences of whether and how firms manage interdependencies within and across an organization's strategic activities. Progress on researching interdependencies fit could be realized by focusing on strategically important activities, and the research challenge is to identify the unobservable processes and routines that underlie interdependencies fit.

[1]  Keren Caspin-Wagner,et al.  The Underexplored Role of Managing Interdependence Fit in Organization Design and Performance , 2013 .

[2]  R E Miles,et al.  Organizational strategy, structure, and process. , 1978, Academy of management review. Academy of Management.

[3]  Raghu Garud,et al.  Managing in the modular age : architectures, networks, and organizations , 2002 .

[4]  Ron Sanchez,et al.  Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design , 1996 .

[5]  R. Langlois.  Modularity in technology and organization , 2002 .

[6]  Richard M. Steers.  When is an organization effective? A process approacht to understanding effectiveness , 1976 .

[7]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Contingency Fit, Institutional Fit, and Firm Performance: A Metafit Approach to Organization-Environment Relationships , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[8]  Carliss Y. Baldwin,et al.  Organization Design for Business Ecosystems , 2012 .

[9]  K. Weick,et al.  Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization , 1990 .

[10]  Danny Miller,et al.  Environmental Fit Versus Internal Fit , 1992 .

[11]  J. March,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm , 1964 .

[12]  Børge Obel,et al.  Erratum: Return on Assets Loss from Situational and Contingency Misfits , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[13]  Nils Stieglitz,et al.  Innovations and the Role of Complementarities in a Strategic Theory of the Firm , 2007 .

[14]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[15]  John Van Reenen,et al.  Why Do Management Practices Differ across Firms and Countries , 2010 .

[16]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  The Option Value of Modularity in Design: An Example From Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity , 2000 .

[17]  Thorbjørn Knudsen,et al.  Organization Design: The Epistemic Interdependence Perspective , 2010 .

[18]  L. Donaldson.  The Contingency Theory of Organizations , 2001 .

[19]  A. Richter,et al.  The Whole Is More Than the Sum of Its Parts— Or Is It? A Review of the Empirical Literature on Complementarities in Organizations , 2010 .

[20]  R. Kahn,et al.  The Social Psychology of Organizations , 1966 .

[21]  M. Porter,et al.  HOW MUCH DOES INDUSTRY MATTER, REALLY? , 1997 .

[22]  N. Venkatraman,et al.  Strategic Orientation of Business Enterprises: The Construct, Dimensionality and Measurement , 2015 .

[23]  HERBERT A. SIMON,et al.  The Architecture of Complexity , 1991 .

[24]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[25]  P. H. Friesen,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of the Corporate Life Cycle , 1984 .

[26]  Daniel A. Levinthal.  Adaptation on rugged landscapes , 1997 .

[27]  Carliss Y. Baldwin,et al.  Managing in an age of modularity. , 1997, Harvard business review.

[28]  Arie Y. Lewin,et al.  Interdependency, Competition, and the Distribution of Firm and Industry Profits , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[29]  John Joseph,et al.  Governance Channels and Organizational Design at General Electric: 1950–2001 , 2006 .

[30]  F. Rothaermel.  Complementary Assets, Strategic Alliances, and the Incumbent's Advantage: An Empirical Study of Industry and Firm Effects in the Biopharmaceutical Industry , 2001 .

[31]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. , 1985 .

[32]  L. Melin,et al.  Innovative Forms of Organizing , 2003 .

[33]  J. Barney.  Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage , 1991 .

[34]  David J. Miller,et al.  Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis , 1986 .

[35]  Charles C. Snow,et al.  Organization Design: The Evolving State-of-the-Art , 2006 .

[36]  Jan W. Rivkin.  Imitation of Complex Strategies , 2000 .

[37]  Arie Y. Lewin,et al.  Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[38]  David R. King,et al.  Performance Implications of Firm Resource Interactions in the Acquisition of R&D-Intensive Firms , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[39]  Scott F. Rockart,et al.  Does interdependency affect firm and industry profitability? an empirical test , 2009 .

[40]  Silvia Massini,et al.  Complementarities in Organisational Innovation and Performance: empirical evidence from the INNFORM survey , 2003 .

[41]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  Open Innovation and Organization Design , 2012 .

[42]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  The role of path dependency and managerial intentionality: a perspective on international business research , 2007 .

[43]  J. March,et al.  Handbook of organizations , 1966 .

[44]  Mayuram S. Krishnan,et al.  Human Capital and Institutional Effects in the Compensation of Information Technology Professionals in the United States , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[45]  Nicolaj Siggelkow.  Firms as Systems of Interdependent Choices , 2011 .