Book contents
- Organization outside Organizations
- Organization outside Organizations
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part 1 Rules, Sanctions, Membership
- Part 2 Organization in and around Markets
- Part 3 Networks and Other Social Relationships
- Part 4 Social Movements and Collective Action
- Part 5 The Partial Organization of Formal Organizations
- 17 Partial De-Organizing for Innovation and Strategic Renewal? A Study of an Industrial Innovation Programme
- 18 The Partial Organization of International Relations: International Organizations as Meta-Organizations
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
17 - Partial De-Organizing for Innovation and Strategic Renewal? A Study of an Industrial Innovation Programme
from Part 5 - The Partial Organization of Formal Organizations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 July 2019
Book contents
- Organization outside Organizations
- Organization outside Organizations
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part 1 Rules, Sanctions, Membership
- Part 2 Organization in and around Markets
- Part 3 Networks and Other Social Relationships
- Part 4 Social Movements and Collective Action
- Part 5 The Partial Organization of Formal Organizations
- 17 Partial De-Organizing for Innovation and Strategic Renewal? A Study of an Industrial Innovation Programme
- 18 The Partial Organization of International Relations: International Organizations as Meta-Organizations
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
The idea of partial organization has not been fully explored. Relatively little attention has been paid to organization within organizations or to the possibility of partial de-organization. We explore this possibility in the context of business firms for which innovation and strategic renewal are imperatives. The firm’s top management created conditions for autonomous action in the form of a dedicated internal development program for strategic renewal. Thus, it attempted to partially deconstruct its organizational hierarchy and other elements of its decided order. Employees from all over the organization were invited to participate in the program and to present proposals for new strategic initiatives. The contribution of the paper is in the introduction of the concept of partial de-organizing and in the argument that partial organization is also observable within, and not just without, the boundaries of formal organizations.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Organization outside OrganizationsThe Abundance of Partial Organization in Social Life, pp. 359 - 389Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Ahrne, G., Aspers, P., & Brunsson, N. (2015) The Organization of Markets. Organization Studies 36(1): 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahrne, G. & Brunsson, N. (2011) Organization outside Organizations: The Significance of Partial Organization. Organization 18(1): 83–104.Google Scholar
Barberio, V., Höllerer, M. A., Meyer, R. E., & Jancsary, D. (2018) Organizational Boundaries in Fluid Forms of Production: The Case of Apache Open-source Software. In Ringel, L., Hiller, P., & Zietsma, C. (eds.), Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Toward Permeable Boundaries of Organizations?, vol. 57. Bingley, UK: Emerald. 139–68.Google Scholar
Beck, N., Bru, J., & Woywode, M. (2008) Momentum or Deceleration? Theoretical and Methodological Reflections on the Analysis of Organizational Change. Academy of Management Journal 51(3): 413–35.Google Scholar
Benner, M. J. & Tushman, M. L. (2003) Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management Review 28(2): 238–56.Google Scholar
Bourgeois, L. J. (1981) On the Measurement of Organizational Slack. Academy of Management Review 6(1): 29–39.Google Scholar
Brunsson, N., Rasche, A., & Seidl, D. (2012) The Dynamics of Standardization: Three Perspectives on Standards in Organization Studies. Organization Studies 33(5–6): 613–32.Google Scholar
Burgelman, R. A. (1983) A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Major Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 28(2): 223–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgelman, R. A. (1991) Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research. Organization Science 2(3): 239–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contino, C. & den Hond, F. (2009) Sense and Sensibility in Managerial Advice. In Buono, A. F. (ed.), Emerging Trends and Issues in Management Consulting: Consulting as a Janus-Faced Reality. Volume 9. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing. 207–38.Google Scholar
Davila, T. & Epstein, M. (2014) The Innovation Paradox. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
de Rond, M. (2014) The Structure of Serendipity. Culture and Organization 20(5): 342–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dougherty, D. & Hardy, C. (1996) Sustained Product Innovation in Large, Mature Organizations: Overcoming Innovation-to-Organization Problems. Academy of Management Journal 39(5): 1120–53.Google Scholar
Elster, J. (1989) The Cement of Society. A Survey of Social Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farson, R. & Keyes, R. (2003) The Innovation Paradox: The Success of Failure, the Failure of Success. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Galunic, D. C. & Rodan, S. (1998) Resource Recombinations in the Firm: Knowledge Structures and the Potential for Schumpeterian Innovation. Strategic Management Journal 19(12): 1193–201.Google Scholar
Garud, R., Tuertscher, P., & Van De Ven, A. H. (2013) Perspectives on Innovation Processes. Academy of Management Annals 7(1): 775–819.Google Scholar
Gibson, C. B. & Birkinshaw, J. (2004) The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal 47(2): 209–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, M. & Birkinshaw, J. (2007) The Innovation Value Chain. Harvard Business Review 85(6): 121–30.Google Scholar
Henderson, R. M. & Clark, K. B. (1990) Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(1): 9–30.Google Scholar
March, J. G. & Simon, H. A. (1993 [1958]) Organizations. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P. & Humphrey, S. E. (2006) The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and Validating a Comprehensive Measure for Assessing Job Design and the Nature of Work. Journal of Applied Psychology 91(6): 1321–39.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. (2008) The Innovation Paradox. Retrieved 1 November 2016 from http://innovateonpurpose.blogspot.fi/2008/10/innovation-paradox.html.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C. K. & Bettis, R. A. (1986) The Dominant Logic. A New Linkage between Diversity and Performance. Strategic Management Journal 7(6): 485–501.Google Scholar
Rouleau, L. & Balogun, J. (2011) Middle Managers, Strategic Sensemaking, and Discursive Competence. Journal of Management Studies 48(5): 953–83.Google Scholar
Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J. F., & Souder, D. (2009) A Typology for Aligning Organizational Ambidexterity’s Conceptualizations, Antecedents, and Outcomes. Journal of Management Studies 46(5): 864–94.Google Scholar
Tripsas, M. (2009) Technology, Identity, and Inertia through the Lens of ‘The Digital Photography Company’. Organization Science 20(2): 441–60.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. & Chia, R. (2002) On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change. Organization Science 13(5): 567–82.Google Scholar
Tushman, M. & Nadler, D. (1986) Organizing for Innovation. California Management Review 28(3): 74–92.Google Scholar
Välikangas, L. & Gibbert, M. (2005) Boundary-Setting Strategies for Escaping Innovation Traps. Sloan Management Review 15 April 2005.Google Scholar
Välikangas, L. & Gibbert, M. (2016) Strategic Innovation: The Definitive Guide to Outlier Strategies. Harlow: Pearson FT Press.Google Scholar
Volberda, H. W., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Mihalache, O. R. (2014) Advancing Management Innovation: Synthesizing Processes, Levels of Analysis, and Change Agents. Organization Studies 35(9): 1245–64.Google Scholar
Vuori, T. O. & Huy, Q. N. (2015) Distributed Attention and Shared Emotions in the Innovation Process: How Nokia Lost the Smartphone Battle. Administrative Science Quarterly DOI:2010.1177/0001839215606951.Google Scholar
- 4
- Cited by