BUS272 TB

Endnotes 607
Phenomenon as ‘Survivor Syndrome’ After Downsizing?” Strategic
Change 15, no. 1 (2006), pp. 1 – 13 ; and J. D. Kammeyer-Mueller,
H. Liao, and R. D. Arvey, “Downsizing and Organizational
Performance: A Review of the Literature from a Stakeholder
Perspective,” Research in Personnel and Human Resources
Management 20 (2001), pp. 269 – 329 .
40 T. Burns and G. M. Stalker, The Management of Innovation (London:
Tavistock, 1961); and J. A. Courtright, G. T. Fairhurst, and
L. E. Rogers, “Interaction Patterns in Organic and Mechanistic
Systems,” Academy of Management Journal , December 1989,
pp. 773 – 802 .
41 This analysis is referred to as a contingency approach to organization
design. See, for example, J. M. Pennings, “Structural
Contingency Theory: A Reappraisal,” in Research in Organizational
Behavior , vol. 14, ed. B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press, 1992), pp. 267 – 309 ; J. R. Hollenbeck, H. Moon,
A. P. J. Ellis, B. J. West, D. R. Ilgen, L. Sheppard, C. O. L. H. Porter,
and J. A. Wagner III, “Structural Contingency Theory and
Individual Differences: Examination of External and Internal
Person-Team Fit,” Journal of Applied Psychology , June 2002,
pp. 599 – 606 ; and A. Drach-Zahavy and A. Freund, “Team
Effectiveness under Stress: A Structural Contingency Approach,”
Journal of Organizational Behavior 28, no. 4 (2007), pp. 423 – 450 .
42 The strategy-structure thesis was originally proposed in A. D.
Chandler Jr., Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the
Industrial Enterprise (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1962). For an
updated analysis, see T. L. Amburgey and T. Dacin, “As the Left
Foot Follows the Right? The Dynamics of Strategic and Structural
Change,” Academy of Management Journal , December 1994,
pp. 1427 – 1452 .
43 The strategy–structure thesis was originally proposed in A. D.
Chandler Jr., Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the
Industrial Enterprise (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1962). For an
updated analysis, see T. L. Amburgey and T. Dacin, “As the Left
Foot Follows the Right? The Dynamics of Strategic and Structural
Change,” Academy of Management Journal , December 1994,
pp. 1427 – 1452 .
44 See R. E. Miles and C. C. Snow, Organizational Strategy, Structure,
and Process (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978); D. C. Galunic and
K. M. Eisenhardt, “Renewing the Strategy-Structure-Performance
Paradigm,” in Research in Organizational Behavior , vol. 16, ed.
B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1994),
pp. 215 – 255 ; I. C. Harris and T. W. Ruefli, “The Strategy/Structure
Debate: An Examination of the Performance Implications,”
Journal of Management Studies , June 2000, pp. 587 – 603 ; and
S. M. Toh, F. P. Morgeson, and M. A. Campion, “Human Resource
Configurations: Investigating Fit with the Organizational
Context,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 4 (2008),
pp. 864 – 882 .
45 M. Mesco, “Moleskine Tests Appetite for IPOs,” Wall Street Journal ,
March 19, 2013, p. B8.
46 See, for example, P. M. Blau and R. A. Schoenherr, The Structure
of Organizations (New York: Basic Books, 1971); D. S. Pugh,
“The Aston Program of Research: Retrospect and Prospect,” in
Perspectives on Organization Design and Behavior , ed. A. H. Van de
Ven and W. F. Joyce (New York: Wiley, 1981), pp. 135 – 166 ;
R. Z. Gooding and J. A. Wagner III, “A Meta-analytic Review of the
Relationship between Size and Performance: The Productivity and
Efficiency of Organizations and Their Subunits,” Administrative
Science Quarterly , December 1985, pp. 462 – 481 ; and A. C.
Bluedorn, “Pilgrim’s Progress: Trends and Convergence in
Research on Organizational Size and Environments,” Journal of
Management , Summer 1993, pp. 163 – 192 .
47 See C. Perrow, “A Framework for the Comparative Analysis
of Organizations,” American Sociological Review , April 1967,
pp. 194 – 208 ; J. Hage and M. Aiken, “Routine Technology, Social
Structure, and Organizational Goals,” Administrative Science
Quarterly , September 1969, pp. 366 – 377 ; C. C. Miller, W. H. Glick,
Y. Wang, and G. P. Huber, “Understanding Technology-Structure
Relationships: Theory Development and Meta-analytic Theory
Testing,” Academy of Management Journal , June 1991, pp. 370 – 399 ;
and W. D. Sine, H. Mitsuhashi, and D. A. Kirsch, “Revisiting Burns
and Stalker: Formal Structure and New Venture Performance in
Emerging Economic Sectors,” Academy of Management Journal 49,
no. 1 (2006), pp. 121 – 132 .
48 G. G. Dess and D. W. Beard, “Dimensions of Organizational Task
Environments,” Administrative Science Quarterly , March 1984,
pp. 52 – 73 ; E. A. Gerloff, N. K. Muir, and W. D. Bodensteiner,
“Three Components of Perceived Environmental Uncertainty:
An Exploratory Analysis of the Effects of Aggregation,” Journal
of Management , December 1991, pp. 749 – 768 ; and O. Shenkar,
N. Aranya, and T. Almor, “Construct Dimensions in the
Contingency Model: An Analysis Comparing Metric and
Non-Metric Multivariate Instruments,” Human Relations , May
1995, pp. 559 – 580 .
49 C. S. Spell and T. J. Arnold, “A Multi-Level Analysis of
Organizational Justice and Climate, Structure, and Employee
Mental Health,” Journal of Management 33, no. 5 (2007),
pp. 724 – 751 ; and M. L. Ambrose and M. Schminke, “Organization
Structure as a Moderator of the Relationship Between Procedural
Justice, Interactional Justice, Perceived Organizational Support,
and Supervisory Trust,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 2
(2003), pp. 295 – 305 .
50 See, for example, L. W. Porter and E. E. Lawler III, “Properties
of Organization Structure in Relation to Job Attitudes and Job
Behavior,” Psychological Bulletin , July 1965, pp. 23 – 51 ; L. R.
James and A. P. Jones, “Organization Structure: A Review of
Structural Dimensions and Their Conceptual Relationships with
Individual Attitudes and Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance , June 1976, pp. 74 – 113 ; C. S. Spell and T. J.
Arnold, “A Multi-Level Analysis of Organizational Justice Climate,
Structure, and Employee Mental Health,” Journal of Management
33, no. 5 (2007), pp. 724 – 751 ; and J. D. Shaw and N. Gupta,
“Job Complexity, Performance, and Well-Being: When Does
Supplies-Values Fit Matter?” Personnel Psychology 57, no. 4 (2004),
pp. 847 – 879 .
51 Based on P. Puranam, M. Raveendran, and T. Knudsen,
“Organization Design: The Epistemic Interdependence
Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 37, no. 3 (2012),
pp. 419 – 440 ; and R. E. Silverman and Q. Fottrell, “The Home Office
in the Spotlight,” Wall Street Journal , February 27, 2013, p. B6.
52 T. Martin, “Pharmacies Feel More Heat,” Wall Street Journal (March
16–17, 2013), p. A3.
53 See, for example, B. Schneider, H. W. Goldstein, and D. B. Smith,
“The ASA Framework: An Update,” Personnel Psychology 48,
no. 4 (1995), pp. 747 – 773 ; and R. E. Ployhart, J. A. Weekley, and
K. Baughman, “The Structure and Function of Human Capital
Emergence: A Multilevel Examination of the Attraction-Selection-
Attrition Model,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 4 (2006),
pp. 661 – 677 .
54 J. B. Stewart, “A Place to Play for Google Staff,” New York Times ,
March 16, 2013, p. B1.
55 P. Dvorak, “Making U.S. Management Ideas Work Elsewhere,” Wall
Street Journal , May 22, 2006, p. B3.
56 See, for example, B. K. Park, J. A. Choi, M. Koo, S. Sul, and I. Choi,
“Culture, Self, and Preference Structure: Transitivity and Context
Independence Are Violated More by Interdependent People,”
Social Cognition , February 2013, pp. 106 – 118 .
57 J. Scheck, L. Moloney, and A. Flynn, “Eni, CNPC Link Up in
Mozambique,” Wall Street Journal , March 15, 2013, p. B3.
58 Z. Yao, Z. Yang, G. Fisher, C. Ma, and E. Fang, “Knowledge
Complementarity, Knowledge Absorption Effectiveness, and
New Product Performance: The Exploration of International Joint