Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Control often weakens autonomy in organizational theories. While many scholars focus on the paradox of control and autonomy, few pay attention to how an organization obtains both control and autonomy. By exploring Zhangjiakou Internal Immigrant Organization, this study finds two mechanisms can contribute to the balanced combination of control and autonomy. First, managers play ambidextrous official-merchant roles, which means superiors take both bureaucratic and autonomous management styles. Second, members have dual organizational goals for both political status and network support. In conclusion, the successful combination is shaped by the subjective interaction between the government, superior managers and subordinate members.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: coercive versus enabling. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 61–89. CrossRef
Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency: a case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10, 43–68. CrossRef
Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the capability-rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69, 61–83. CrossRef
Aycan, Z., & Berry, J. W. (1996). Impact of employment-related experiences on migrants’ psychological well-being and adaptation to Canada. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 28(3), 240–251. CrossRef
Baker, W. E. (1990). Market networks and corporate behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 589–625. CrossRef
Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Managing across boarders: the transnational solution (2nd ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Bowen, D. E., & Edward, E. L. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: what, why, how and when. Sloan Management Review, 33(3), 31–40.
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
Butcher, K. F., & Ann, M. P. (1998). Cross-City evidence on the relationship between immigration and crime. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 17, 457–493. CrossRef
Card, D. (2001). Migrant inflows, native outflows, and the local labor market impacts ofHigher immigration. Journal of Labor Economics, 19, 22–64. CrossRef
Catherine, T., Renata, K., & McKelvey, B. (2005). Managing the MNC and exploitation/exploration dilemma: from static balance to dynamic oscillation. Advances in Strategic Management, 22, 213–247.
Coase, R. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economic, 4, 386–405.
Cockburn, I. M., Rebecca, M. H., & Scott, S. (2000). Untangling the origins of competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1123–1145. CrossRef
Demunck, V. C., & Sobo, E. J. (Eds.). (1998). Using methods in the field: a practical introduction and casebook. Walnut Creek: Alta Mira Press.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields. American Sociological Review, 46, 147–160. CrossRef
Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Reading: Addison Wesley.
Goodburn, C. (2015). Migrant girls in Shenzhen: gender, education and the urbanization ofAspiration. The China Quarterly, 222, 320–338. CrossRef
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380. CrossRef
Gulati, R., & Gargiulo, M. (1999). Where do interorganizational networks come from? American Journal of Sociology, 105, 177–231.
Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). Theinterplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 693–706. CrossRef
Hagan, J., & Alberto, P. (1999). Sociological criminology and the mythology of Hispanic immigration and crime. Social Problems, 46, 617–632. CrossRef
Joskow, P. L. (1988). Asset specificity and the structure of vertical relationships: empirical evidence. Journal of Law, Economics & Organization, 4, 95–117.
Kim, T., Shin, D., & Jeong, Y. (2016). Inside the “hybrid” iron cage: political origins ofHybridization. Organization Science, 27(2), 428–445. CrossRef
Lapalombara, J. (2000). Power and politics in organizations: public and private sector comparisons. In M. Dierkes, A. Antal, J. Child, & I. Nonaka (Eds.), The handbook of organizational learning and knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. (2010). Explorationand exploitation within and across organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 4, 109–155. CrossRef
Levy, D. T. (1985). The transaction cost approach to vertical integration: an empirical examination. Review of Economics and Statistics, 67, 438–445.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–87. CrossRef
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363. CrossRef
Meyer, A. D., Nakane, J., Miller, J. G., & Ferdiws, K. (1989). Flexibility: the next competitive battle the manufacturing futures survey. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 135–144. CrossRef
Milofsky, C. (1981). Structure and process in community self-help organizations. New Haven: Yale Program on Non-Profit Organizations. Working Paper No. 17.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23, 242–266. CrossRef
Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 129–141. CrossRef
Poole, M. S., & Van, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562–578.
Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295–336.
Rainey, H. G., & Milward, H. B. (1981). Public organizations, policy network and environments. In R. A. Hall & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Organization theory and public policy. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. M. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34, 375–409. CrossRef
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20, 685–696. CrossRef
Reynaud, E., & Reynaud, J. D. (1994). La regulation conjointe et ses dereglements. Le Travail Humain, 57, 227–238.
Rivkin, J. W., & Siggelkow, N. (2003). Balancing search and stability: interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Science, 49, 290–311. CrossRef
Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dixon, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Schumpeter, J. (1976). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper.
Scott, W. R. (1981). Organizations: rational, natural and open systems. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Sheremata, W. A. (2000). Centrifugal and centripetal forces in radical new product development under time pressure. Academy of Management Review, 25, 389–408. CrossRef
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, 864–894. CrossRef
Thorelli, H. B. (1986). Networks: between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal, 7, 37–51. CrossRef
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38, 8–29. CrossRef
Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward the flexible form: how to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 76, 359–374. CrossRef
Walker, D., & Weber, D. (1984). A transaction cost approach to maker-or-buy decisions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 373–391. CrossRef
Williamson, O. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: The Free Press.
Yu, K. (2013). Organizing migrants: meaning generation in the community. Work, employment, and Society, 28, 355–371. CrossRef
Zand, D. (1974). Collateral organization: a new change strategy. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 10, 63–89. CrossRef
- Control or Autonomy? A Case Study of two Organizational Forms in the Zhangjiakou Internal Migrant Organization
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© BBL, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Neuer Inhalt/© hww, Best Practices zu agiler Qualität