Search results

The objective of this paper is to analyze the organizational change in 100 of the largest Spanish firms (a new national context) over the period 1993‐2003 (a more recent time period).

To achieve this purpose, consideration has been given to both traditional organizational categories and new organizational forms, such as cooperative multidivisional, competitive multidivisional, and the internal network. Detailed definitions of the new organizational forms being developed by companies are provided in the paper. Thus, these new organizational forms may differ in several aspects, such as the decision‐making process and integration between divisions.

The results show that over this period, Spanish firms experienced a steadily rising trend towards divisionalization. The cooperative multidivisional structure is the one most frequently adopted in Spain, as opposed to the competitive multidivisional form and the internal network.

The systematic study of the distinctive attributes of the new forms of organization, providing accumulated knowledge, is in an emergent phase of development in the international field, and this work seeks to contribute to such development. The nature of the study strengthens the global implications of the work, and the information obtained from top practitioners in these Spanish firms enhances the contribution of the study.

Internal capital markets of diversified firms have been associated with inefficient allocation of investment funds across divisions, leading to value losses. Utilizing a sample of diversified firms that adopted or eliminated Residual Income (RI) plans between 1990 and 2009, we show that adoptions of these plans mitigate investment distortions and lead to value gains. Following the adoption of RI plans, diversified firms start allocating investment funds based on growth opportunities of their divisions. RI plan adopters lower their divisional investment levels, especially in segments with below-average growth opportunities. The overall investment allocation efficiency improves, and the diversification discount diminishes after the adoption of RI plans. However, RI plans appear to be used only as temporary tools for assessing corporate performance. The plans are adopted primarily by firms expected to immediately generate plan bonuses for management, and they are frequently eliminated by firms with bad accounting performance and low managerial bonuses. The study contributes to the literature on organizational efficiency, internal capital markets, and on the importance of measures based on economic profits or RI.

Since the seminal contributions of Chandler and Williamson, a substantial body of research in industrial organization has examined the performance benefits of the organizational innovation of divisionalization. While existing empirical work has, for the most part, utilized a static framework to analyse the performance effects of divisionalization, adopts a dynamic approach, thereby allowing the intertemporal nature of any such performance benefits to be examined. Presents results from the UK manufacturing industry; the model estimated uses a spline function to incorporate differing organizational regimes over time. The results obtained are less supportive of the benefits of divisionalization than certain of the earlier empirical studies; thus the evidence presented lends no support to the view that organizational change provides unambiguous performance benefits for the firm.

In this chapter, the author outlines the link between organization design and competitive strategy, focusing on rivalry. A firm’s organization design choices can affect its competitive advantage as well as the strategic decisions of its rivals. Therefore, organization design can influence the nature and intensity of competitive interactions between firms. To illustrate this effect, the author focuses on the literature on divisionalization and offers a set of propositions as examples. Taken together, the author makes three main observations: (1) a firm’s competitive position and objectives are reflected in its organizational choices; (2) heterogeneity in competitive position and objectives lead to heterogeneity in organization design choices across firms; and (3) organization design and competitive strategy are interdependent processes. The author concludes by discussing the implications for strategy and management research and pointing out some opportunities for future research.

In today’s constantly evolving global business environment, multidivisional firms (MDFs) require an organizational structure for supply chain management (SCM) that facilitates the development of supply chain agility. This research aims to investigate what structural elements of an MDF’s SCM team contribute to supply chain agility.

A two-sample field study was conducted. Four MDFs with top-performing supply chains (Sample 1) were first studied to identify agility-supporting structural elements. Then, quantitative data from 35 MDFs with contrasting levels of supply chain agility (Sample 2) were collected to test the theoretical propositions advanced from Sample 1 findings.

The results reveal four structural elements that exert a positive impact on an MDF’s supply chain agility: hierarchical position of the divisional top supply chain executive, scope of divisional supply chain operations, hierarchical position of the top supply chain executive at the headquarters and scope of SCM coordination by the headquarters.

First, this study provides a comparatively comprehensive understanding of the SCM organization structure in MDFs. Second, this study is one of the first to provide empirically supported theoretical insights about the linkage between an MDF’s organizational structure for SCM and supply chain agility.

Has the fear of technology involvement prevented many senior managers of multidivisional firms from playing a major role in new product technology decisions?

This paper investigates the relationship between organizational structures and the performance of FORTUNE 500 companies, which have always been among the most profitable and admired in the world. After a discussion of whether companies should organize regionally, nationally, or globally, the important assumption is made that each structural type utilizes resources differently in generating profit. Performance is conceptualized as Return on Capital Employed (RoCE) and Return per Employee (RpE). A sample of 50 companies was randomly selected. Testing revealed that structural types are positively related to financial performance, calculated as RoCE, with Multidivisional-structured companies outperforming Functional-structured ones; structural types are not related to human resource performance, calculated as RpE.

Purpose – The broader aim of the research is to better understand the origins of firm heterogeneity in terms of strategy and structure, looking beyond convergence pressures resulting from economic and institutional forces.

Design/methodology/approach – To identify firm-specific differences, the paper uses an in-depth analysis of two matched cases, comparing the introduction of diversification strategies and decentralized organizational structures in two Dutch banks. Based on detailed archival research it tries to understand how different outcomes were shaped by political processes involving a variety of internal and external actors.

Findings – The research shows the importance of these processes and, in particular, the role of management succession as a trigger for organizational changes as well as the potential power of management consultants based on a combination of their own “political” skills and the opportunity provided by internal divisions. Moreover, the study confirms the view that organizational change requires a change in dominant ideology.

Research limitations/implications – The research was able to go beyond the limitations of extant studies based on cross-sectional data or single cases. It demonstrates the usefulness of historical analysis when examining changes in strategy and structure. Its results need to be confirmed by conducting similar studies in different contexts.

Originality/value – The paper provides new insights into the complex and dynamic processes of organizational change and shows how external consultants – within a specific set of circumstances – were able to manage these processes. The results are valuable to scholars studying organizational change and those looking at consultants and their role. They might also provide insights for practicing managers working or planning to work with consultants.

Ronald Coase's landmark 1937 article, “The Nature of the Firm,” framed the study of organizational economics for decades. Coase asked three fundamental questions: Why do firms exist? What determines their boundaries? How should firms be organized internally? To answer the first question, Coase famously appealed to “the costs of using the price mechanism,” what we now call transaction costs or contracting costs, a concept that blossomed in the 1970s and 1980s into an elaborate theory of why firms exist (Alchian & Demsetz, 1972; Williamson, 1975, 1979, 1985; Klein, Crawford, & Alchian, 1978; Grossman & Hart, 1986). The second question has generated a huge literature in industrial economics, strategy, corporate finance, and organization theory. “Why,” as Coase (1937, pp. 393–394) put it, “does the entrepreneur not organize one less transaction or one more?” In Williamson's (1996, p. 150) words, “Why can't a large firm do everything that a collection of small firms can do and more?” As Coase recognized in 1937, the transaction-cost advantages of internal organization are not unlimited, and firms have a finite “optimum” size and shape. Describing these limits in detail has proved challenging, however.¹

Alfred D. Chandler was the most important business historian of the twentieth century, who described and analyzed how large industrial firms are organized and managed in the USA from the late nineteenth to late twentieth centuries.

This paper is a personal memoir and tribute to Dr Chandler and examines his methods, selected writings, and his legacy.

His concepts and models are widely accepted and applied to North America, Western Europe, and most advanced industrial economies, taking on an air of universality. At the close of the twentieth century, however, a rise of high‐tech industries and rapidly growing, non‐western economies challenged many of the universalistic assumptions embedded in Chandler's work. At the beginning of the twenty‐first century, Chandler's writings suggest nothing more than how much time, place, and people matter.

This paper adds a more personal touch to Dr Chandler.