Search results

In this paper we extend established concepts of product and process architectures to propose a concept of organization architecture that defines the essential features of the system design of an organization needed to achieve an effective strategic alignment of an organization with its competitive and/or cooperative environment. Adopting a work process view of organization, we draw on concepts of product and process architectures to elaborate fundamental elements in the design of an organization architecture. We suggest that organization architectures may be designed to support four basic types of change in organization resources, capabilities, and coordination, which we characterize as convergence, reconfiguration, absorptive integration, and architectural transformation. We also suggest the kinds of strategic flexibilities that an organization must have to create and implement each type of organization architecture. We identify four basic types of strategic environments and consider the kinds of changes in resources, capabilities, and coordination that need to be designed into an organization's architecture to maintain effective strategic alignment with its type of environment. We then propose a typology that identifies four basic ways in which organizational architectures may be effectively aligned with strategic environments. Extending the reasoning underlying the proposed alignments of organization architectures with strategic environments, we propose a strategic principle of architectural isomorphism, which holds that maintaining effective strategic alignment of an organization with its environment requires achieving isomorphism across a firm's product, process, and organization architectures. We conclude by considering some implications of the analyses undertaken here for competence theory, general and mid-range strategy theory, and organization theory.

This article proposes a conceptual basis upon which to address strategic design as business intellectual capital.

A literature review was carried out on the subjects of strategic design and intellectual capital.

A conceptual basis is derived from the theoretical proposal that strategic design is an intangible, critical factor, which favors organizational competitiveness, when it impacts the betterment of organizational and intellectual capital processes.

On the level of business practice, this article submits a broadened view of design, which may be applied to organizational strategic processes and which transcends its emphasis in the production of goods or services.

In previous literature, strategic design has not been addressed as intellectual capital, which supports the resolution of strategic problems.

Organization change (OC) is increasingly important in today's volatile world. Understanding OC is a growing emphasis of management and organization (M&O) research and the singular focus of OC scholarship and practice. We show how selected M&O theories inform OC at the organization level. These theoretical perspectives diverge on issues central to OC. We explore what these conceptual differences mean for OC study and practice going forward.

Exonomic and competitive pressures have largely caused leaner and more responsive organisations to become the primary objectives of organisational designers over the past decade. Most of these initiatives, though, have been aimed at senior management levels and have yielded mixed results. Self‐design is a strategic restructuring alternative that can potentially overcome many of the liabilities of traditional design approaches and help engender employee commitment to today′s flatter, more decentralised organisation. Though there are many prescriptions evolving from conceptualisations of the self‐designing organisation, there are very few successful examples of self‐design in practice, especially as a strategic change management tool. This case study is intended to help fill this void and intertwine theory with the practice of self‐design.

The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to a void in the literature on enterprise flexibility: The Management Control Systems’ (MCS) role in the enterprise flexibility and stability discussion. MCS can be instrumental in securing an organization’s strategic performance objectives, far beyond the mere managerial control and accounting perspectives of traditional MCS’ roles.

This study is qualitative in nature, and presents a theoretical approach with a conceptual model to address enterprise flexibility and stability jointly; arguing that both should be part of the MCS’ design and implementation with a distinct strategic outlook. Several theoretical and practical arguments are presented which reinforce this thesis.

To operate optimally, enterprises must be able to manage their limited resources in efficient and effective manner. This is especially so when dealing with uncertainty and contingencies on an ongoing basis, while following a defined strategic choice. Such choices are expected to mirror enterprise flexibility types and measures without neglecting enterprise stability requirements, linking both to strategic performance measurement indicators.

Further work is needed to explore not only how different types of enterprise flexibility and stability measures can bring additional benefits to the firm but also how best to apply such types in accordance with business and operations strategies, organizational stability requirements and management control strategies.

MCS can and should take part of an organization’s strategic performance measures but these are to be understood from a systemic design perspective of the enterprise system’s metacontrollability, addressing flexibility and stability jointly.

There is a need to reevaluate the role of MCS and their strategic potential. The approach presented can have valuable potential ramifications and insights for management and information sciences as well as for the enterprise management practitioners as a whole.

This paper provides original research on enterprise flexibility and stability analysis, covering all aspects of MC and its role on the enterprise’s metacontrollability. Design and coordination of the seven basic elements which comprise MCS are analyzed, as well as how they influence one another. The paper includes two tables to illustrate the approach being proposed. Table I presents a classification of the literature reviewed in the paper while Table AI presents the choice of the theoretical lens on enterprise flexibility from other authors which contrasts with the model proposed. The role of MCS in the enterprise is also included.

The authors argue that organization design needs to play a more active role in the explanation of differential performance and outline a set of ideas for achieving this both in theoretical and empirical research. Firms are heterogeneous in terms of (1) how well they do things, capturing persistent productivity differences, and (2) how they do things – and both reflect firms’ organization design choices. Both types of heterogeneity can be persistent, and are interdependent, although they have typically been studied separately. The authors propose a simple formal framework – the “aggregation function framework” – that aligns organization design thinking with the emphasis on performance heterogeneity among firms that is characteristic of the strategy field. This framework allows for a more precise identification of how exactly organization design may contribute to persistent performance differences, and therefore what exactly are the assumptions that strategy and organization design scholars need to be attentive to.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how business process management (BPM) is incorporated within organisational structure. The authors demonstrate how a strategic interest in BPM and formal responsibilities for BPM activities shape the efficiency, quality and agility of BPM initiatives. By conducting field research, useful empirical insights were drawn about the necessary conditions for ensuring the success of BPM initiatives.

A questionnaire survey of BPM adoption practices was conducted among private- and public-sector organisations with more than 50 employees. A cross-national sample of 60 Croatian and 51 Slovenian companies is analysed by applying a subsampling strategy and using inferential statistics methods.

The study clearly shows how particular structural decisions can foster the operational excellence of BPM initiatives. Formal process roles and specialised BPM units were recognised as important drivers of organisational success. In addition, how strategic support and related structural choices create a synergistic effect and make process efforts worthwhile is explained.

The research findings offer useful benchmarking of current BPM practices. The developed BPM commitment matrix represents a simple tool for self-assessment. Its path-dependent logic provides guidelines for improving the outcomes of BPM governance in general, and BPM initiatives specifically.

The paper extends previous research by showing the performance effects of several BPM governance practices. The results clearly suggest that the best outcomes of BPM initiatives were achieved by organisations that had introduced a strategic approach to BPM, along with having defined a centralised BPM responsibility and assigned decentralised process ownership roles.

The field of organization development is fragmented and lacks a coherent and integrated theory and method for developing an effective organization. A 20-year action research program led to the development and evaluation of the Strategic Fitness Process (SFP) – a platform by which senior leaders, with the help of consultants, can have an honest, collective, and public conversation about their organization's alignment with espoused strategy and values. The research has identified a syndrome of six silent barriers to effectiveness and a dynamic theory of organizational effectiveness. Empirical evidence from the 20-year study demonstrates that SFP always enables truth to speak to power safely, and in a majority of cases enables senior teams to transform silent barriers into strengths, realign their organization's design and strategic management process with strategy and values, and in a few cases employ SFP as an ongoing learning and governance process. Implications for organization and leadership development and corporate governance are discussed.