IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ebg/iesewp/d-0381.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Forms of organizing: What is new and why?

Author

Listed:
  • Ricart, Joan E.

    (IESE Business School)

  • Sieber, Sandra

    (IESE Business School)

  • Svejenova, Silviya

    (IESE Business School)

Abstract

This paper aims to further our understanding of new forms of organizing by asking and answering two related questions: What is new in forms of organizing? and Why is it so? It starts by examining the main forces that lead to the emergence and diffusion of new organizational arrangements, distinguishing between objective and subjective factors and pointing out the interplay between the two. Elaborating on these two groups of factors, the paper introduces two dimensions ‹flexibility and openness‹ on which a contingency analysis of new forms of organizing and a classification are built. Flexibility is associated with the question «How fast does the organization as a whole have to learn?», while openness is intended to measure the need for knowledge integration and the location of relevant knowledge. Having outlined the main trends in the development of organizational arrangements, the paper looks at some of the implications. The use of information and communication technologies, knowledge management, changes in human resource practices and social contract, and changes in management roles and careers are all seen as consequences of a new quest for openness and flexibility. All these considerations lead to the conclusion that, nowadays, changes in organizational patterns are radical, calling for a paradigm change that will facilitate, in a holistic manner, the adjustments that are needed in order to build and manage these organizations. Like any paradigm change, this requires a change in the mindset of the agents involved, especially the decision-makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricart, Joan E. & Sieber, Sandra & Svejenova, Silviya, 1999. "Forms of organizing: What is new and why?," IESE Research Papers D/381, IESE Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebg:iesewp:d-0381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iese.edu/research/pdfs/DI-0381-E.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pankaj Ghemawat & Joan E. I Ricart Costa, 1993. "The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 59-73, December.
    2. Richard J. Boland & Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi, 1995. "Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 350-372, August.
    3. Janet Fulk & Gerardine DeSanctis, 1995. "Electronic Communication and Changing Organizational Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 337-349, August.
    4. Edward J. Zajac & Brian R. Golden & Stephen M. Shortell, 1991. "New Organizational Forms for Enhancing Innovation: The Case of Internal Corporate Joint Ventures," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 170-184, February.
    5. Henk W. Volberda, 1996. "Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 359-374, August.
    6. Ghemawat, Pankaj & Ricart, Joan E., 1993. "Organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency, The," IESE Research Papers D/255, IESE Business School.
    7. Kathleen R. Conner & C. K. Prahalad, 1996. "A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 477-501, October.
    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. Basu, Sandip & Phelps, Corey & Kotha, Suresh, 2011. "Towards understanding who makes corporate venture capital investments and why," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 153-171, March.
    2. Matthew S. Kraatz & Edward J. Zajac, 2001. "How Organizational Resources Affect Strategic Change and Performance in Turbulent Environments: Theory and Evidence," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(5), pages 632-657, October.
    3. Paul S. Adler & Barbara Goldoftas & David I. Levine, 1999. "Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 43-68, February.
    4. Justin Tan & Yong Zeng, 2009. "A stage-dependent model of resource utilization, strategic flexibility, and implications for performance over time: Empirical evidence from a transitional environment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 563-588, September.
    5. Kurokawa, Sam & Iwata, Satoshi & Roberts, Edward B., 2007. "Global R&D activities of Japanese MNCs in the US: A triangulation approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 3-36, February.
    6. James B. Thomas & Stephanie Watts Sussman & John C. Henderson, 2001. "Understanding “Strategic Learning”: Linking Organizational Learning, Knowledge Management, and Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 331-345, June.
    7. Samer Faraj & Georg von Krogh & Eric Monteiro & Karim R. Lakhani, 2016. "Special Section Introduction—Online Community as Space for Knowledge Flows," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 668-684, December.
    8. Maria Giuseppina Bruna & Luc Frédéric Ducray & Nathalie Montargot, 2017. "Décrypter les ambiguïtés de la société post-moderne pour penser la morphologie de l'entreprise de demain. Une illustration réticulaire," Post-Print hal-01867619, HAL.
    9. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Hideo Owan, 2013. "Autonomy, Conformity and Organizational Learning," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-21, July.
    10. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.
    11. Yi Liu & Wenqian Li & Yuan Li, 2020. "Ambidexterity between low cost strategy and CSR strategy: contingencies of competition and regulation," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 633-660, September.
    12. Julian Birkinshaw & Mats Lingblad, 2005. "Intrafirm Competition and Charter Evolution in the Multibusiness Firm," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 674-686, December.
    13. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    14. Ranjay Gulati & Phanish Puranam, 2009. "Renewal Through Reorganization: The Value of Inconsistencies Between Formal and Informal Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 422-440, April.
    15. Oana Buliga & Christian W. Scheiner & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2016. "Business model innovation and organizational resilience: towards an integrated conceptual framework," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(6), pages 647-670, August.
    16. Tan, Justin & Wang, Liang, 2010. "Flexibility-efficiency tradeoff and performance implications among Chinese SOEs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 356-362, April.
    17. Jingxian Liu & Yingyu Wu & Lili Liu, 2023. "Impact of Environmental Uncertainties and Strategic Flexibility in Innovation Activities on NEV Battery Recycling Firms in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-16, February.
    18. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    19. Jia, Ning, 2018. "Corporate innovation strategy and stock price crash risk," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 155-173.
    20. Koulikidou, Kleopatra & Chantziaras, Antonios & Dedoulis, Emmanouil & Leventis, Stergios, 2023. "Regulatory enforcement, foreignness, and language negativity: Evidence from SEC comment letters," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    new forms of organizing; new organizational arrangements;

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Industrial Sociology (FCT-UNL)

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ebg:iesewp:d-0381. 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: Noelia Romero (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ienaves.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.