MANA 8331
(Section 00580)
Organization Theory and Strategy
Spring 2005
Instructor: Barbara Carlin, Ph.D.E-mail:
Office:310-A Melcher HallOffice hours: 9-10 am W/Th
Office Phone:713 743-4661
COURSE DESCRIPTION
This seminar is a doctoral level introduction to key issues and perspectives in Organization Theory and Strategy. The course is intended to achieve several objectives:
- Exposure to the main theoretical streams in each discipline.
- Provide examples of theorizing and of empirical exploration.
- Permit discussion of the interrelationships between theory and method, strategy and OT, differing perspectives and differing levels of analysis.
- Introduction to the variety of publications in the field and their philosophies and perspectives.
COURSE REQUIREMENTS
Grades will be assessed as a combination of three components, participation in class discussions, summary of one article/week, short paper assignments (one per week).
Participation
As a seminar course, it is imperative that participants arrive at the seminar having read the material and prepared to discuss it. Each week each seminar participant will be assigned one of the next week’s articles to prepare for discussion. Nothing written is required. The students should be prepared to summarize the paper, the research questions and findings and those aspects of the paper that the student found most interesting or relevant. The specific format of the paper summary is:
- Is the paper conceptual or empirical?
- Summary of the model/research question.
- A summary of the empirical results in English. I do not want a list of each hypothesis and whether it was supported or not. I want a summary statement of what we know now that we didn’t know before the research was conducted.
- Was the method used to test the hypothesis (for empirical papers) appropriate? What are the weaknesses of the method?
- What new or remaining questions does this research raise or leave behind?
Short Papers
Every week students will submit a short (3 page) paper on the topic listed in the syllabus below. The purpose of the multitude of short papers is to:
- force students to write regularly
- focus attention on the conceptual aspects of research
- practice concise writing
Each paper is graded on a 100 point scale.
MISC. POLICIES
The University is committed to providing reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities. A student needing such accommodations may make prior arrangements with the instructor for any exam or assignment so that accommodations can be made. Also, a student with a disability should seek information on services and assistance from the Center for Students with disabilities (713 743-5400).
The University of Houston recognizes the importance of academic honesty in maintaining high standards within academic programs. In the rare situation where there may be a breach of academic honesty, please bring this matter to my attention. I will take appropriate preventative action whenever possible. If you have any questions about the UH Academic Honesty Policy, please consult the Student Handbook or the Dean of Students Office (713 743-5470).
Schedule
Session 1: January 18, 2005
Introductions
Review of syllabus, class policies and procedures
Session 2:January 25, 2005
Topic: Introduction to Organization Theory
Paper Topic: What are the similarities and differences between organizational behavior and organization theory?
Perrow, C., 1973. The short and glorious history of organizational theory. Organizational Dynamics, Summer, 2(1): 2-15.
Weick, K.E., 1979.The Social Psychology of Organizing (2nd Ed.), Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Chs. 1 & 2.
Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A.H., 1983. Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(1): 245-273.
Scott, W.R., 1992.Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems, 3rd Ed., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ch. 1.
Supplemental Readings
Carroll, G.R., 1993. A sociological perspective on why firms differ. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 237-249.
Pfeffer, J., 1996. Understanding organizations: Concepts and controversies. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rousseau, D.M., 1985. Issues of level in organizational research. In L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 7: 1-37.
Session 3: February 1, 2005
Topic: Organizational Design: Contingency and Configurational Approaches
Paper Topic: Does organization structure matter? Why or why not?
Child, J., 1973. Predicting and understanding organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(2): 168-185.
Van de Ven, A.H, and Drazin, R., 1985. The concept of fit in contingency theory. In Barry M. Staw and Larry L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 7: 333-365. JAI Press.
Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A.S., & Hinnings, C.R., 1993. Configurational approaches of organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1175-1195.
Doty, D.H., Glick, W.H., & Huber, G.P., 1993. Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6): 1196-1250.
Supplemental Readings
Gresov, C., & Drazin, R., 1997. Equifinality: Functional equivalence in organizational design. Academy of Management Review, 22(2): 403-428.
Kimberly, J.R., 1976. Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: A review, critique and proposal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(4): 571-597.
Session 4: February 8, 2005
Organizational Ecology, Organizational Adaptation and Change
Paper Topic: Are there limits to how quickly or how much an organization can change in an attempt to adapt to environmental changes?
Meyer, A.D. 1982. Adapting to environmental jolts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(4): 515-537.
Hannan, M.T., & Freeman, J.H., 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49(2): 149-164.
Haveman, H., 1992. Between a rock and a hard place: Organizational change under conditions of fundamental environmental transformation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1): 48-75.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509-533.
Supplemental Readings
Amburgey, T., Kelly, D., & Barnett, B., 1993. Resetting the clock: The dynamics of organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1): 51-73.
Gioia, D., & Thomas, J., 1996. Identity, image and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3): 370-403.
Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W.H., Huber, G.P., 2001. Organizational actions in response to threats and opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5): 937-955.
Gersick, C., 1991. Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Academy of Management Review, 16: 145-179.
Romanelli, E., Tushman, M.L., 1994. Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1141-1166.
Session 5:February 15, 2005
Institutional Theory
Paper Topic: Population ecologists and sociologists say we tend to imitate each other (i.e. organizations adapts to the same environmental conditions, we advise companies to benchmark against “best practices”). If this is so and if organizations need to resemble other organizations in the same industry in order to gain legitimacy, then how do organizations also change or act creatively?
Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2): 340-363.
Zucker, L.G., 1977. The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American Sociological Review, 42(5): 726-743.
DiMaggio, P.J., & Powell, W.W., 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147-160.
Dacin, M.T., Goodstein, J., Scott, W.R., 2002. Institutional theory and institutional change: Introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1): 45-57.
Supplemental Readings:
Westphal, J., Gulati, R., & Shortell, S., 1997 Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequence of TQM adoption. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(2): 366-394.
Haveman, H.A. 1993. Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism, and entry into new markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(4): 593-627.
Scott, W.R., 1987. The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32: 493-511.
Westphal, J., & Zajac, E., 1994. Substance and symbolism in CEO’s long-term incentive plans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 367-390.
Session 6:February 22, 2005
Decision Making and Managerial Cognition
Paper Topic: If organizational success is a function of matching the organization with the environment, then why is decision making or cognition important?
Cohen, M.D., March, J.G., & Olsen, J.P., 1972. A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1): 1-25.
Einhorn, H.J., & Hogarth, R.M., 1981. Behavioral decision theory: Processes of judgement and choice. Annual Review of Psychology, 32: 53-88.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3): 543-576.
Maitlis, S., Ozcelik, H., 2004. Toxic decision processes: A study of emotion and organizational decision making. Organization Science, 15(4): 375-393.
Supplemental Reading:
Sutcliffe , K.M., 1994. What executives notice: Accurate perceptions in top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5): 1360-1378.
March, J.G., Shapira, Z., 1992. Behavioral decision theory and organizational decision theory. In M. Zey (Ed.), Decision Making: Alternatives to Rational Choice Models, 273-303: Newbury Park, NJ: Sage Publications
Howard, R.A., 1981. An assessment of decision analysis. Operations Research, 24(1): 4-27.
Beyer, J.M., 1981. Ideologies, values, and decision making in organizations. In P. Nystrom & W. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Design, 166-202. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.
Jackson, S.E., & Dutton, J.E., 1988. Discerning threats and opportunities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33: 370-388.
Session 7:March 1, 2005
Organizational Learning & Knowledge
Paper Topic: Learning is an individual phenomenon, so is the term “organizational learning” merely a reification?
Daft, R.L., & Weick, K.W., 1984. Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9: 284-295.
Huber, G.P., 1991. Organizational learning: The contributing processes and literatures. Organization Science, 2(1): 88-115.
Anderson, P., 1999. Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10(3): 216-232.
Crossan, M., Cunha, M.P., Vera, D., Cunha, J., 2005. Time and Organizational Improvisation. The Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 129-145.
Supplemental Readings:
Liebeskind, J.P., 1996. Knowledge, strategy and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 93-107.
Birkinshaw, J., Nobel, R., Ridderstrale, J., 2002. Knowledge as a contingency variable: Do the characteristics of knowledge predict organization structure? Organizational Science, 13(3): 274-289.
Vera, D., & Crossan, M., 2002. Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Working paper, submitted to Academy of Management Review.
Simon, H., 1991. Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 125-134.
Foss, N.J., 1996. Knowledge-based approaches to the theory of the firm: Some critical comments. Organization Science, 7: 470-476.
Session 8:March 8, 2005
Introduction to Strategy, Contingency Theory
Paper Topic: What are the similarities and differences between Strategy and Organization Theory?
Hofer, C.W., 1975. Toward a contingency theory of business strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 18(4): 784-810.
Mintzberg, H., 1990. The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 11: 171-195.
Miles, R.E., Snow, C.C., Meyer, A.D., Coleman, H.J., 1978. Organizational strategy, structure and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3): 546-562.
Bowman, E.H., Helfat, C.E., 2001. Does corporate strategy matter? Strategic Management Journal, 22(1): 1-23.
Supplemental Readings:
Hambrick, D., & Lei, D., 1985. Toward an empirical prioritization of contingency variables for business strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 28(4): 763-788.
Cyert, R., Kumar, P., & Williams, J. 1993. Information, market imperfections and strategy. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue, 14: 47-58.
Schoonhoven, C.B., 1981. Problems with contingency theory: Testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26: 349-377.
Ansoff, H.I., 1991. Critique of Henry Mintzberg’s ‘The design school: Reconsidering the basi premises of strategic management’. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6): 449-461.
Mintzberg, H., 1991. Learning1, Planning 0: Reply to Igor Ansoff. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6): 463-466.
Farjoun, M., 2002. Towards an organic perspective on strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 23(7): 561-594.
March 15, 2005 Spring Break
Session 9:March 22, 2005
Environment and Economics and Agency
Paper Topic: How is the environment conceptualized similarly or differently in Organization Theory and Strategy research?
Teece, D., 1982. Toward the economic theory of the multi-product firm. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3: 39-63.
Eisenhardt, K., 1989. Agency theory: Assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14: 57-74.
Hawawini, G., Subramanian, V., Verdin, P., 2003. Is performance driven by industry- or firm-specific factors? A new look at the evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 24(1): 1-16.
Venkatraman & Prescott, 1990. Environment-strategy coalignment: An empirical test of its performance implications. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1): 1-23.
Supplemental Reading:
Lubatkin, M. & Chatterjee, S., 1994. Extending modern portfolio theory into the domain of corporate diversification: Does it apply? Academy of Management Journal, 37(1): 109-136.
Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics: 3: 305-360.
Fama E., & Jensen, M., 1983. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301-325.
Miller, D., 1987. The structural and environmental correlates of business strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 8: 55-76.
Zahra, S. & Pearce, J., 1989. boards of directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15: 291-334.
Hoskisson, R. & Hitt, M. 1990. Antecedents and performance outcomes of diversification: A review and critique of theoretical perspectives. Journal of Management, 16: 461-09.
Session 10:March 29, 2005
Industrial Organization (IO) Perspectives
Paper Topic: What are the limits, if any, of the application of Economic/Industrial Organization theory to Strategy?
Ouchi, W., 1980. Markets, bureaucracies and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 129-141.
Porter, M.E., 1981. The contributions of industrial organization to strategic management. Academy of Management Review, 6: 609-620.
Dyer, J., 1997. Effective interfirm collaboration: How firms minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 535-556.
Rumelt, R., Schendel, D., & Teece, D., 1991. Strategic management and economics. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue, 12: 5-29.
Supplemental Reading:
Porter, M.E., 1980. Competitive Strategy, New York: The Free Press.
Madhok, A., 2002. Reassessing the fundamentals and beyond: Ronald Coase, the transaction cost and resource-based theories of the firm and the institutional structure of production. Strategic Management Journal, 23(6): 535-550.
Caves, R., 1984. Economic analysis and the quest for competitive advantage. American Economic Review, March/April: 137-156.
Coase, R., 1988. The nature of the firm: Nature, meaning, influence. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 4: 3-49.
Rumelt, R., 1991. How much does industry matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12: 167-185.
Session 11:April 5, 2005
The Resource Based View (RBV) of the Firm
Paper Topic: How is the RBV similar to or different from the IO perspective of Strategy?
Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5: 171-180.
Barney, J., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17: 99-120.
Prahalad, C.K. & Hamel, G., 1991. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3): 79-91.
Conner, K., & Prahalad, C.K., 1996. A resource-based theory of the firm: Knowledge versus opportunism. Organization Science, 7: 477-501.
Supplemental Reading:
Kogut, B., Zander, Ul, 1996. What firms do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning. Organization Science, 7(5): 502-518.
Wiggins, R.R., Ruefli, T.W., 2002. Sustained competitive advantage: Temporal dynamics and the incidence and persistence of superior economic performance, Organization Science, 13(1): 82-105.
Conner, K., 1991. Historical comparison of resource-based theory and five school of thought within industrial organization economics: Do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of Management, 17: 121-154.
Barton, L.D., 1992. Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue, 13: 111-125.
Session 12:April 12, 2005
Cooperative Strategies
Paper Topic: Since free market theory advocates competition among firms, when does cooperation become collusion?
Thorelli, H., 1986. Networks: Between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal, 7: 37-51.
Kogut, B., 1988. Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 9: 375-385.
Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C., 1990. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review, 15(4): 603-625.
Hitt, M.A., Hoskisson, R.E., Ireland, R.D., Harrison, J.S., 1991. Effects of acquisitions on R&D inputs and outputs. The Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 693-706.
Supplemental Reading:
Li, S.X., Rowley, T.J., 2002. Inertia and evaluation mechanisms in interorganizational partner selection: Syndicate formation among U.S. investment banks. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6): 1104-1119.
Harrigan, K. 1988. Joint ventures and competitive strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 9: 141-158.
Hamel, G., 1991. Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 12(1): 83-103.
Session 13:April 19, 2005
Potpourri I
Paper Topic: Is there such a thing as Strategy theory or is Strategy an application of OB and OT?
Waddock, S., & Graves, S., 1997. The corporate social performance-financial performance link, Strategic Management Journal, 18: 303-319.
Bowman, E.H., Hurry, D., 1993. Strategy through the options lens: An integrated view of resource investments and the incremental-choice process. The Academy of Management Review, 18(4): 760-782.
Fiegenbaum, A., Thomas, H., 1988. Attitudes toward risk and the risk-return paradox: Prospect theory explanations. Academy of Management Journal, 31: 85-106.
Liebeskind, J.P., Oliver, A.L., Zucker, L., Brewer, M., 1996. Social networks, learning, and flexibility: Sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms. Organization Science, 7(4): 428-443.
Supplemental Reading:
Trevino, L.K., 1986. Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3): 601-617.
Abrahamson, E., Park, C., 1994. Concealment of Negative Organizational Outcomes: An agency theory perspective. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(5): 1302-1334.
Rowley, T.J., Moldoveanu, M., 2003. When will stakeholder groups act? An interest- and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 204-219.
Solomon, R., 1992. Corporate roles, personal virtues: An Aristotelian approach to business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2: 317-339.
Donaldson, T., Dunfee, T., 1994. Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19: 252-284.
Weaver, G.R., Agle, B.R., 2002. Religiosity and ethical behavior in organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27(1): 77-97.
Soule, E., 2002. Managerial moral strategies – in search of a few good principles. Academy of Management Review, 27(1): 114-124.
Session 14: April 26, 2005
Potpourri II
Paper Topic: What are the two most important things you learned in this class this semester and how, if at all, do they relate to reach other?
Chakravarthy, B.S., Doz, Y., 1992. Strategy process research: Focusing on corporate self renewal. Strategic Management Journal, Special Summer Issue, 13: 5-14.
Chen, M-J, 1996. Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 21: 100-134.
Gimeno, J., & Woo, C., 1996. Hypercompetition in a multimarket environment: The role of strategic similarity and multimarket contact in competitive de-escalation. Organization Science, 7: 322-341.
Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M., 2003. Hospitals as cultures of entrapment: A reanalysis of the Bristol Royal Infirmary. California Management Review, 45(2): 73-84.
Supplemental Reading
McGahan, A.M., Porter, M.E., 2003. The emergence and sustainability of abnormal profits, Strategic Organization, 1(1): 79-108
1