OT Flashcards
(21 cards)
GST
Latham, G., Locke, E.A. (2007). Goal Setting Theory
= General
Goals -> performance
Moderators:
• Feedback
• Commitment
• Task complexity
Mechanisms: • Goals energize people • Goals lead to persistence • Goals direct attention • Goals lead people to search for suitable task strategies
Higher and more specific -> more motivation -> less boredom
GST
Thompson, J. D., & McEwen, W. J. (1958). Organizational goals and environment: Goal-setting as an interaction process
Goal setting = a recurring problem of defining the desired relationship between an organization and its environment
= especially relevant in fast changing situations
The degree to which the environment has control over the organization’s goals (in order of degree of control):
- Coalition
- Co-optation
- Bargaining
- Competition
Less tangible product of an enterprise = more difficult to measure
GST
Bateman, T. S., O’Neill, H., & Kenworthy-U’Ren, A. (2002). A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Top managers
Relationship between goal content and hierarchical
Outside of the laboratory: self-set goals
Goal content. different types of goals (personal):
- Personal
- Financial
- Customer
- Market
- Operations
- Product
- Organizational
- People
- Competitive
- Strategy making
Multiple goals
Goal levels -> Hierarchical (project goals):
- Ultimate = personal
- Enterprise = long term firm goals
- Strategic = competitive advantage
- Project = discrete objectives
- Process = tactical strategy
Top managers in different countries tell what their goals are
“How do people set goals?” • Self-efficacy: belief in your own abilities regarding the goal or task(s) • Past performance • Social influences • Cultural influences
GST
Kotlar, J., & De Massis, A. (2013). Goal Setting in Family Firms: Goal Diversity, Social Interactions, and Collective Commitment to Family-centered Goals
= Family firms (complex environment)
Parts of a family firm
- Owners
- Family
- Business
The complexity leads to: • Goal diversity • Conflicts between parts • Conflicts within parts • Conflicts between different generations
Forming organizational goals:
Coalition forming = internal bargaining and side payments (Problem = invisible bargaining and side payments, more personal)
Stabilizing goals = elaborating in goal systems
Continuously updating goals
Four types of individual goals:
- Family & economic: generate wealth for family
- Family & non-economic: family harmony, status
- Non-family & economic: firm’s economic, financial performance
- Non-family & non-economic: employees, community
Findings:
- Goal diversity is more pronounced when succession is imminent;
- Goal diversity leads to social interaction to stabilize conflict
- Professional, business sphere
- Family sphere - Social interaction within the family sphere seems to be more effective
SIT
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. (2005). New Developments in Social Interdependence Theory
Two types of social interdependence:
- Positive = when the actions of individuals promote the achievement of joint goals -> greater performance -> supports relationship between group members -> supports psychological health and self-esteem
- Negative = when the actions of individuals obstruct the achievement of each other’s goals
SIT
Deutsch, M. (1949). A Theory of Co-operation and Competition
Interdependence between goals of people acting in small groups
POSITIVE = Cooperative -> promotively interdependent -> increase success for both NEGATIVE = Competitive -> contrierly interdependent -> decrease success for both
RBV
Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive
Resources must be VRIN to result in better performance:
Valuable = reduce costs or increase value
Rare = not the same resource as competitors
Imitable = hard to mimic
Non-Substitutable =
Firm resource heterogeneity & immobility -> VRIN -> Sustained competitive advantage WITHIN sectors
Performance = the prices of a firm as a result of the imp of its strategies
RBV
Miller, D., Shamsie, J. (1996). The Resource-Based View of the Firm in Two Environments: The Hollywood Film Studios from 1936 to 1965
= Hollywood film studios
Externalistic view of organizational performance proposed by SCP (structure, conduct, performance models)
Types:
Property-based = specific and fixed
vs
Knowledge-based = less specific and flexible
Dimensions:
Discrete = stand alone, value independent
vs
Systemic = part of a whole
Moderator = predictable/uncertain environmental dynamics
Imitability changes under different levels of environ dynamics
RBV
Newbert, S. L. (2008). Value, Rareness, Competitive Advantage, and Performance: A Conceptual-Level Empirical Investigation of the Resource-Based View of the Firm
Focus on values/rareness, not types of resources
The effect of strategic resources
Resources = tangible or intangible assets
Resources capabilities = intangible processes that enable a firm to conceive or implement strategies
SCT
Donaldson, L., & Joffe, G. (2014). Fit - The Key to Organizational Design.
= design of an org needs to fit its contingencies
Three contingencies:
- Competitive strategy
Multinational corporations include also local responsiveness and global integration
- Organizational size; vertical and horizontal differentiation
Number of layers grow quicker for smaller companies -> respond to size growth incrementally = delegation and extra behavioral rules
- Task Uncertainty
- Low; routine
- Moderate; variable
- High; novel
Higher task uncertainty -> lower performance -> adapt strategies
SCT
Volberda, H. W., van der Weerdt, N., Verwaal, E., Stienstra, M., & Verdu, A. J. (2012). Contingency fit, institutional fit, and firm 5 performance: A meta fit approach to organization-environment relationships.
Level of FIT -> Performance
Estimate the fit between Organizational Structure and Organizational Contingency
Contingency misfit
is the sum of the deviations of the response variables
technology, structure, and culture.
Institutional misfit = profile deviation of best performers
-> how mimicry is evoked by copying best practice
SCT
Burton, R. M., Lauridsen, J., & Obel, B. (2002). Return on Assets Loss from Situational and Contingency Misfits
Multicontingency
Focus on misfits: Extreme misfit is a condition for which we have information that it will decrease performance consistent with the misfit definition -> positive impact of avoiding misfits
Types of fit:
1. Situational fit (SF) = balance of the environmental conditions, the strategy, the management style, the climate, the size, and the technology -> any situational misfit hurts performance
- Contingency fit (CF) = is a match between the organization structure and contingency factors that have a positive effect on performance
TCT
Williamson, O. (2007). Transaction Cost Economics: An Introduction
Markets and hierarchies are alternative ways to organize transactions; governance structures
Asset specificity = all investments actors do to make a transaction possible
Governance structure = arrangement that coordinates and controls an economic transaction between actors
- Ownership autonomy
- Incentive intensity
- Administrative controls
- Adaptation
Higher chance of shirking when working together
TCT
Dyer, J. H. (1997). Effective interim collaboration: how firms minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value
Car supplier-automaker relationship
Relation-specific investments induce higher transaction costs
TC = dollar value of goods per procurement employee
Japanese transactors have higher investments, but lower transaction costs than US because;
- Repeated transactions
- Higher av volume
OE
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural Inertia and Organizational Change
Structural inertia
Organizational changes of some kinds occur frequently and that organizations may manage to make radical changes in strategies and structures.
OE
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1988). The Ecology of
Organizational Mortality: American Labor Unions
Ecology of organizational mortality in American National Labour Unions
Union morality is affected by characteristics of individual organizations and the life chances of unions are affected by changes in the economic, legal and political environments
OE
Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2002). Mimicry and the Market: Adoption of a New Organizational Form
Adoption of a new form
DV = the adoption of a PA-form
IV (predictor variables) = market feedback, social networks, percentage of adopters among similarly sized firms, percentage of adopters among geographically proximate firms
RDT
Boyd, B. (1990). Corporate Linkages and Organizational Environment: A Test of the Resource Dependence Model.
Two competing views on relation environment - corporate board:
- Management control approach; board has no relevant contributions to strategy
- Resource dependence approach; board gains access to scarce resources and info
Dess & Beard’s dimensions:
- Munificence; available resources
- Dynamism; turbulence or instability
- Complexity; heterogeneity
RDT
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1997). The design and management of externally controlled organizations
Resource dependence -> managerial intervention -> outcome
The behavior of organizations: how organizations relate to other social actors in their environment
Boundary = other entities have control over activities/actions of participants -> competing claims of others
Cope with resource dependency:
- Environment-action
- Managerial roles
- Interventions
Minimize dependence on other, maximize dependence of others
NIT
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
= strategic responses to institutional processes
Specifies the nature of responses given features of IPs
Institutional orders require appropriate organizational responses that vary
Types of strategic responses
- Acquiesce; habits, imitate
- Compromise = balance, pacify, bargain
- Avoid = Conceal, buffer, escape
- Defy = dismiss, challenge, attack
- Manipulate = co-opt, influence, control
Isomorphism = extent to which orgs fit their structure
- coercive; pressures exerted on orgs
- normative; prof interrelationships
- mimetic; orgs imitations
Economic fitness decreases efficiency, social fitness increases
Norms and values constrain and guide economic choice
NIT
Raaijmakers, A. G. M., Vermeulen, P. A. M., Meeus, M. T. H., & Zietsma, C. (2015). I Need Time! Exploring Pathways to Compliance under Institutional Complexity
Tests how and to what extent distinct levels of institutional complexity cause differences in the delay of intended compliance
IV = support of a powerful external constituent, support of org members DV = delay of intended compliance
Research model;
- Control
- Content
- Cause
Decision makers planned to use the time afforded by delays in compliance either as resource for buffering uncertainty or as a resource for their own actions
