Within Organization Economics and Management Theory, two largely separate streams of outsourcing literature dominate the discussion and have been applied extensively: the governance perspective
(New Institutional Economics, especially Transaction Cost Economics) and the competence perspective
(Resource- and Knowledge-Based View) of the firm (Foss 1993). We argue that neither theory has sufficient explanatory power with respect to outsourcing failure.
Within the New Institutional Economics, Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) (Williamson
1985; 1979; Klein et al. 1978) is most relevant to firm boundary choice. Tangential theories include
Agency Theory (Holmstrom and Milgrom 1994; 1991) and Property Rights Theory (Grossman and
Hart 1986). In TCE, firms are perceived as avoiders of negative in an environment of opportunistic actors. They can enforce cooperation more effectively than the market and thus save transaction costs
(e.g., search, monitoring, or contracting costs). TCE identifies cooperation/motivation problems (induced by opportunism) as a primary reason for outsourcing failure, arguing that opportunism is a necessary condition for transaction costs (Williamson 1985). There are two important gaps in this theory:
First, postulating opportunism favours a bias toward cooperation problems and downplays coordination issues (Frost 2005; Hodgson 2004; Foss 1999; Camerer and Knez 1996; Demsetz 1988). Second,
TCE focuses solely on vertical exchange processes through a separable interface (Langlois and Foss
1999; Langlois 1992; Walker and Weber 1984). However, horizontal, collaborative, and/or informal relations have been shown to play a key part in inter-firm organization (Kirsch et al. 2002; Grandori
2001). Their role in outsourcing fa...
... middle of paper ...
...edges) between the nodes. Our model depicts the organization as a graph, with nodes (organization members) connected by both vertical and horizontal relations. We also rely on
Modular Systems Theory (Simon 2002; Baldwin and Clark 2000; Schilling 2000; Baldwin and
Clark 1997; Simon 1962) by including the notion that the relational structure of an organization can be manipulated to create largely independent modules (modularization) and reduce transaction costs.
Finally, in order to identify potential problems of spatial remoteness, we differentiate ownership and location effects. Along with Grossman and Helpman (2005; 2004; 2002a; 2002b), we differentiate three types of outsourcing: domestic outsourcing (ownership split), foreign direct investment
(FDI), also called captive offshoring (cross-country split), and offshore outsourcing (ownership and cross-country split).
Doughty, K. C. (2000, July 24). Jeanne Lewis at Staples, Inc. (A)(Abridged). Harvard Business School Organizational Behavior Cases . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Boje, D. M. , Luhman, J. T. , and Cunliffe, A. L. “ A Dialectic Perspective on the Organization
Kibbe, C. (2004, 07 09). Outsourcing: the good, the bad and the inevitable. New Hampshire Business Review, pp. 1A-21A.
Roberts, J. (2004) The modern firm: organizational design for performance and growth. Oxford: Oxford University Press
In terms of the political frame, the employer’s job is to influence and negotiate with people inside and outside of the company. If done correctly, these strategies give the employer access to key players in the industry by building strong alliances. If these strategies are used incorrectly, the employer is viewed as a con artist or thug and is distrusted by employees and outside companies who believe the employer is a fraud or is manipulating them.1
Outsourcing is a technique for companies to reassign specific responsibilities to external entities. There are several motivations for outsourcing including organizational, improvement, cost, and revenue advantages (Ghodeswar & Vaidyanathan, 2008).
Danger of Incipient Entrants - The more effortless it is for beginning organizations to enter the business, the more vicious rivalry there will be. Variables that can repress the risk of early contestants are kenned as obstructions to entrance. A few cases include:• Power of Suppliers - This is the amount of weight suppliers can put on a business. In the event that one supplier has a cosmically sufficiently enormous effect to influence an organization 's edges and volumes, then it holds generous puissance. Here are a couple of reasons that supplie...
Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., Donnelly, J.H., & Konopaske, R. (2009). Organizations: Behaviors, structure, processes (13th ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
significant activities in the strategic way better than the rivalry firms (Lüsted, 2012). It is
Adner & Helfat 2003, ‘Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24, pp. 1011-1025.
Greenwood, R., & Miller, D. (2010). Tackling Design Anew: Getting Back to the Heart of Organization Theory. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24 (4), 78-88.
Understanding the structure of an organization plays a vital role in laying the blueprint for how a company will be managed and organized. It provides a well-defined framework that outlines the roles and responsibilities of each employee in a particular company. It shows how each employee interacts and works one another in achieving the goals of a company. In other words, organizational structure is a reflection of the working relationships that govern the workflow of the company. It has a profound effect on a company’s structural dimensions, which includes formalization, specialization, hierarchy and centralization.
Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2006). Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic, and Postmodern Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.
Organizations must operate within structures that allow them to perform at their best within their given environments. According to theorists T. Burns and G.M Stalker (1961), organizations require structures that will allow them to adapt and react to changes in the environment (Mechanistic vs Organic Structures, 2009). Toyota Company’s corporate structure is spelt out as one where the management team and employees conduct operations and make decisions through a system of checks and balances.
The Open System model ‘conceives an organisation as a combination of parts with independent relationships and op...