IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v45y1999i11p1479-1495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Simulating Project Work Processes and Organizations: Toward a Micro-Contingency Theory of Organizational Design

Author

Listed:
  • Raymond E. Levitt

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-4020)

  • Jan Thomsen

    (Det Norske Veritas, Veritasveien 1, N-1322 Hovik, Norway)

  • Tore R. Christiansen

    (Det Norske Veritas, Veritasveien 1, N-1322 Hovik, Norway)

  • John C. Kunz

    (Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-4020)

  • Yan Jin

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Southern California, Denney Research Building, #10, Los Angeles, California 90089-1111)

  • Clifford Nass

    (Department of Communications, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-2050)

Abstract

The Virtual Design Team (VDT) extends and operationalizes Galbraith's (1973) information-processing view of organizations. VDT simulates the micro-level information processing, communication, and coordination behavior of participants in a project organization and predicts several measures of participant and project-level performance. VDT-1 (Cohen 1991) and VDT-2 (Christiansen 1993) modeled project organizations containing actors with perfectly congruent goals engaged in complex but routine engineering design work within static organization structures. VDT-3 extends the VDT-2 work process representation to include measures of activity flexibility, complexity, uncertainty, and interdependence strength. It explicitly models the effects of goal incongruency between agents on their information processing and communication behavior while executing more flexible tasks. These extensions allow VDT to model more flexible organizations executing less routine work processes. VDT thus bridges rigorously between cognitive and social psychological micro-organization theory and sociological and economic macro-organization theory for project teams. VDT-3 has been used to model and simulate the design of two major subsystems of a complex satellite launch vehicle. This case study provides initial evidence that the micro-contingency theory embodied in VDT-3 can be used to predict organizational breakdowns, and to evaluate alternative organizational changes to mitigate identified risks. VDT thus supports true "organizational engineering" for project teams.

Suggested Citation

  • Raymond E. Levitt & Jan Thomsen & Tore R. Christiansen & John C. Kunz & Yan Jin & Clifford Nass, 1999. "Simulating Project Work Processes and Organizations: Toward a Micro-Contingency Theory of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1479-1495, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:11:p:1479-1495
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.45.11.1479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.11.1479
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.45.11.1479?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas W. Malone & Kevin Crowston & Jintae Lee & Brian Pentland & Chrysanthos Dellarocas & George Wyner & John Quimby & Charles S. Osborn & Abraham Bernstein & George Herman & Mark Klein & Elissa O'Do, 1999. "Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 425-443, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ogulin, R. & Selen, W. & Ashayeri, J., 2010. "Determinants of Informal Coordination in Networked Supply Chains," Discussion Paper 2010-133, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    2. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    3. Henri Barki & Alain Pinsonneault, 2005. "A Model of Organizational Integration, Implementation Effort, and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 165-179, April.
    4. Koichi Terai & Masahiko Sawai & Naoki Sugiura & Noriaki Izumi & Takahira Yamaguchi, 2002. "Business process semi‐automation based on business model management," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 215-234, October.
    5. Stephen Guisinger, 2001. "From OLI to OLMA: Incorporating Higher Levels of Environmental and Structural Complexity into the Eclectic Paradigm," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 257-272.
    6. Daniel D. Zeng & J. Leon Zhao, 2005. "Effective Role Resolution in Workflow Management," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 374-387, August.
    7. Ogulin, R. & Selen, W. & Ashayeri, J., 2010. "Determinants of Informal Coordination in Networked Supply Chains," Other publications TiSEM 6bbf5984-752c-4760-b899-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Eric Overby, 2008. "Process Virtualization Theory and the Impact of Information Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 277-291, April.
    9. Florian Johannsen & Susanne Leist, 2012. "Wand and Weber’s Decomposition Model in the Context of Business Process Modeling," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 4(5), pages 271-286, October.
    10. Adhikary, Anirban & Sharma, Amalesh & Diatha, Krishna Sundar & Jayaram, Jayanth, 2020. "Impact of buyer-supplier network complexity on firms’ greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: An empirical investigation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    11. Eric Overby & Sandra A. Slaughter & Benn Konsynski, 2010. "Research Commentary ---The Design, Use, and Consequences of Virtual Processes," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 700-710, December.
    12. Tyson R. Browning, 2018. "Building models of product development processes: An integrative approach to managing organizational knowledge," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 70-87, January.
    13. Jan HRON & Tomas MACAK, 2011. "Adaptive organization design based on system integration," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(12), pages 565-572.
    14. Albert Plugge & Jacques Brook, 2013. "From Fragmented to Integrated IT Service Delivery: Identifying Coordinating Challenges," Working Papers 2013/04, Maastricht School of Management.
    15. Amit Basu & Robert W. Blanning, 2003. "Synthesis and Decomposition of Processes in Organizations," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 337-355, December.
    16. Alexander Osterwalder & Yves Pigneur, 2002. "An e-Business Model Ontology for Modeling e-Business," Industrial Organization 0202004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Tyson R. Browning, 2009. "The many views of a process: Toward a process architecture framework for product development processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 69-90, March.
    18. Tyson R. Browning & Ernst Fricke & Herbert Negele, 2006. "Key concepts in modeling product development processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 104-128, June.
    19. Temponi, Cecilia & Bryant, Michael D. & Fernandez, Benito, 2009. "Integration of business function models into an aggregate enterprise systems model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 793-800, December.
    20. Brian T. Pentland, 2003. "Conceptualizing and Measuring Variety in the Execution of Organizational Work Processes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(7), pages 857-870, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:45:y:1999:i:11:p:1479-1495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.