Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/wiley/strategy-structure-and-environment-context-influences-upon-some-Fw5apojXqm
References (19)
-
J. Kimberly (1976)
Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: a review, critique, and proposalAdministrative Science Quarterly, 21
-
P. Khandwalla (1972)
Environment and Its Impact on the OrganizationInternational Studies of Management and Organization, 2
-
D. Miller, P. Friesen (1978)
Archetypes of Strategy FormulationManagement Science, 24
-
F. Paine, C. Anderson (1977)
CONTINGENCIES AFFECTING STRATEGY FORMULATION AND EFFECTIVENESS: AN EMPIRICAL STUDYJournal of Management Studies, 14
-
P. Khandwalla (1976)
THE TECHNO‐ECONOMIC ECOLOGY OF CORPORATE STRATEGYJournal of Management Studies, 13
-
L. Donaldson, J. Child, H. Aldrich (1975)
The Aston Group Findings on Centralization: Further DiscussionAdministrative Science Quarterly, 20
-
R. Merton (1940)
Bureaucratic Structure and PersonalitySocial Forces, 18
-
G. Downs, Lawrence Mohr (1976)
Conceptual issues in the study of innovationAdministrative Science Quarterly, 21
-
Henry Mintzberg (1973)
Strategy-Making in Three ModesCalifornia Management Review, 16
-
R. Mansfield (1973)
Bureaucracy and Centralization: An Examination of Organizational Structure.Administrative Science Quarterly, 18
-
J. Child, R. Mansfield (1972)
Technology, Size, and Organization StructureSociology, 6
-
J. Child (1972)
Organization Structure and Strategies of Control: A Replication of the Aston StudyAdministrative Science Quarterly, 17
-
R. Peterson, D. Berger (1971)
Entrepreneurship in Organizations: Evidence from the Popular Music IndustryAdministrative Science Quarterly, 16
-
Richard Normann (1971)
Organizational Innovativeness: Product Variation and ReorientationAdministrative Science Quarterly, 16
-
P. Khandwalla (1974)
Mass Output Orientation of Operations Technology and Organizational Structure.Administrative Science Quarterly, 19
-
B. Hedberg, P. Nystrom, W. Starbuck (1976)
Camping on Seesaws: Prescriptions for a Self-Designing Organization -
Dennis Moberg, J. Koch (1975)
A Critical Appraisal of Integrated Treatments of Contingency FindingsAcademy of Management Journal, 18
-
D. Hickson, D. Pugh, D. Pheysey (1969)
Operations Technology and Organization Structure: An Empirical ReappraisalAdministrative Science Quarterly, 14
-
H. Aldrich (1972)
Technology and Organization Structure: A Re-examination of the Findings of the Aston GroupAdministrative Science Quarterly, 17
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1979 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
- ISSN
- 0022-2380
- eISSN
- 1467-6486
- DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1979.tb00389.x
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
In studying organizational adaptation most researchers tend to draw sample‐ wide conclusions about the relationships among strategic, structural, and environmental variables. More often than not, the findings of different investigators are in conflict. Particular variables are said by some to covary positively, while different studies demonstrate a negative relationship. This paper attempts to show that the direction and significance of bivariate product‐moment correlations may vary significantly, logically, and systematically according to the adaptive approach used by firms. A sample of firms is segmented into four parts, which are internally homogeneous in the evolutionary patterns among environmental, organizational, and strategy‐making variables. The findings from a correlational analysis of each sub‐sample indicate how some common discrepancies in the literature show the promise of being resolved when the differences in the contexts of the bivariate relationships are examined.
Journal
Journal of Management Studies – Wiley
Published: Oct 1, 1979