IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v29y2018i5p873-889.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple Organization Goals with Feedback from Shared Technological Task Environments

Author

Listed:
  • Songcui Hu

    (Eller College of Management, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721)

  • Richard A. Bettis

    (Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599)

Abstract

Goals and the performance feedback on those goals are fundamental to organizational learning and adaptation. However, most research has focused on single overall, high-level organizational goals while ignoring important operational goals farther down in the goal hierarchy. This paper explores the important issue of interdependent feedback on multiple operational goals with shared task environments. We conjecture about the impact of shared technological task environments on feedback across goals. We then empirically examine these conjectures using panel vector autoregression (PVAR) analysis of performance feedback from three strategically important operational goals with shared technological task environments in the automobile industry. We find that interdependent feedback can lead to severe and misleading confusion regarding learning from feedback on such goals with shared task environments. Then, we discuss the implications of our findings. These include the following: the absolute intractability of the problem of meeting multiple goals with interdependent task environments as the number of goals increases; limits on the modularity of organization structure; and severe challenges in ex post credit assignment and ex ante planning when goals share technological task environments. Finally, we discuss the application of PVAR to interdependent feedback problems in organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Songcui Hu & Richard A. Bettis, 2018. "Multiple Organization Goals with Feedback from Shared Technological Task Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 873-889, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:29:y:2018:i:5:p:873-889
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2018.1207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1207
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2018.1207?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. Jürgen Mihm & Christoph H. Loch & Dennis Wilkinson & Bernardo A. Huberman, 2010. "Hierarchical Structure and Search in Complex Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 831-848, May.
    2. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas & Newey, Whitney & Rosen, Harvey S, 1988. "Estimating Vector Autoregressions with Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(6), pages 1371-1395, November.
    3. Jürgen Mihm & Christoph Loch & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2003. "Problem--Solving Oscillations in Complex Engineering Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 733-750, June.
    4. Nada Mora & Andrew Logan, 2012. "Shocks to bank capital: evidence from UK banks at home and away," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(9), pages 1103-1119, March.
    5. Allen Head & Huw Lloyd-Ellis & Hongfei Sun, 2014. "Search, Liquidity, and the Dynamics of House Prices and Construction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1172-1210, April.
    6. Timothy Zandt, 1999. "Decentralized Information Processing in the Theory of Organizations," International Economic Association Series, in: Murat R. Sertel (ed.), Contemporary Economic Issues, chapter 7, pages 125-160, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. Daniela P. Blettner & Fernando R. Chaddad & Richard A. Bettis, 2012. "The CEO Performance Effect: Statistical Issues and a Complex Fit Perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(8), pages 986-999, August.
    8. repec:bla:obuest:v:61:y:1999:i:0:p:631-52 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    10. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2001. "Vector Autoregressions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 101-115, Fall.
    11. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal & Rishi R. Roy, 2008. "The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 939-955, May.
    12. Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
    13. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 4-21, February.
    14. Love, Inessa & Zicchino, Lea, 2006. "Financial development and dynamic investment behavior: Evidence from panel VAR," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 190-210, May.
    15. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, April.
    16. Jan W. Rivkin, 2000. "Imitation of Complex Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 824-844, June.
    17. G. S. Maddala & Shaowen Wu, 1999. "A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(S1), pages 631-652, November.
    18. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2003. "Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 650-669, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tohyun Kim & Daegyu Yang, 2020. "Multiple Goals, Attention Allocation, and the Intention-Achievement Gap in Energy Efficiency Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Daniel A. Levinthal & Claus Rerup, 2021. "The Plural of Goal: Learning in a World of Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 527-543, May.
    3. Tomasz Obloj & Metin Sengul, 2020. "What do multiple objectives really mean for performance? Empirical evidence from the French manufacturing sector," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(13), pages 2518-2547, December.
    4. Rilinger, Georg, 2021. "The organizational roots of market design failure structural abstraction, the limits of hierarchy, and the California energy crisis of 2000/01," MPIfG Discussion Paper 21/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    5. Vibha Gaba & Henrich R. Greve, 2019. "Safe or Profitable? The Pursuit of Conflicting Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 647-667, July.
    6. Daniel Fürstenau & Abayomi Baiyere & Kai Schewina & Matthias Schulte-Althoff & Hannes Rothe, 2023. "Extended Generativity Theory on Digital Platforms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1686-1710, December.
    7. Aseem Kaul, 2021. "Putting the horse back before the cart: designing strategic social enterprises," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(3), pages 103-108, December.

    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. Daniel A. Levinthal & Maciej Workiewicz, 2018. "When Two Bosses Are Better Than One: Nearly Decomposable Systems and Organizational Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 207-224, April.
    2. Oliver Baumann & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2013. "Dealing with Complexity: Integrated vs. Chunky Search Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 116-132, February.
    3. Jörg Claussen & Tobias Kretschmer & Nils Stieglitz, 2015. "Vertical Scope, Turbulence, and the Benefits of Commitment and Flexibility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 915-929, April.
    4. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Madjid Tavana & Takao Terano, 2020. "Product development team formation: effects of organizational- and product-related factors," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 88-122, March.
    5. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Javad Nasiry, 2020. "Organizational Structure, Subsystem Interaction Pattern, and Misalignments in Complex NPD Projects," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(1), pages 214-231, January.
    6. Giovanni Dosi & Marco Faillo & Luigi Marengo & Daniele Moschella, 2011. "Toward Formal Representations of Search Processes and Routines in Organizational Problem Solving. An Assessment of the State of the Art," LEM Papers Series 2011/04, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    7. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    8. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Distributed Problem Solving in Modular Systems: the Benefit of Temporary Coordination Neglect," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 124-136, January.
    9. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    10. Ali Fakih & May Ibrahim, 2016. "The impact of Syrian refugees on the labor market in neighboring countries: empirical evidence from Jordan," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 64-86, February.
    11. Suranjit, K, 2016. "The effect of non-performing loans on the LMICs with a focus on the macroeconomy and institutional quality," MPRA Paper 121443, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Dec 2017.
    12. Jürgen Mihm & Christoph H. Loch & Dennis Wilkinson & Bernardo A. Huberman, 2010. "Hierarchical Structure and Search in Complex Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 831-848, May.
    13. Pazouki, Azadeh & Zhu, Xiaoxian, 2022. "The dynamic impact among oil dependence volatility, the quality of political institutions, and government spending," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    14. Michael R.M. Abrigo & Inessa Love, 2016. "Estimation of Panel Vector Autoregression in Stata: a Package of Programs," Working Papers 201602, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    15. Puay Khoon Toh & Gautam Ahuja, 2022. "Integration and appropriability: A study of process and product components within a firm's innovation portfolio," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(6), pages 1075-1109, June.
    16. Gang Zhang & Ruoyang Gao, 2010. "Modularity and incremental innovation: the roles of design rules and organizational communication," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 171-200, June.
    17. Friederike Wall, 2016. "Agent-based modeling in managerial science: an illustrative survey and study," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 135-193, January.
    18. Tufool Alnuaimi & Gerard George, 2016. "Appropriability and the retrieval of knowledge after spillovers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1263-1279, July.
    19. Felipe A. Csaszar, 2018. "A note on how NK landscapes work," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 7(1), pages 1-6, December.
    20. Feiz Abadi, Javad & Gligor, David M. & Alibakhshi Motlagh, Somayeh & Srivastava, Raj, 2024. "When and under what conditions ambidextrous supply chains prove effective? Insights from simulation and empirical studies," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    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:ororsc:v:29:y:2018:i:5:p:873-889. 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.