IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v69y2023i3p1703-1713.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Capability Building in Sluggish Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Kfir Eliaz

    (Tel Aviv University, 6997801 Tel Aviv, Israel; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112)

  • Ran Spiegler

    (Tel Aviv University, 6997801 Tel Aviv, Israel; University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom)

Abstract

In order to thrive, organizations need to build and maintain an ability to meet unexpected external challenges. Yet many organizations are sluggish: their capabilities can only undergo incremental changes over time. What are the stochastic processes governing “routinely occurring” challenges that best prepare a sluggish organization for unexpected challenges? We address this question with a stylized principal-agent model. The “agent” represents a sluggish organization that can only change its capability by one unit at a time, and the “principal” represents the organization’s head or its competitive environment. The principal commits ex ante to a Markov process over challenge levels. We characterize the process that maximizes long-run capability for both myopic and arbitrarily patient agents. We show how stochastic, time-varying challenges dramatically improve a sluggish organization’s preparedness for sudden challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Kfir Eliaz & Ran Spiegler, 2023. "Capability Building in Sluggish Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1703-1713, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:3:p:1703-1713
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4445
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4445?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Felipe Varas & Iván Marinovic & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2020. "Random Inspections and Periodic Reviews: Optimal Dynamic Monitoring," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(6), pages 2893-2937.
    2. Peter Iliev & Ivo Welch, 2013. "A Model of Operational Slack: The Short-Run, Medium-Run, and Long-Run Consequences of Limited Attention Capacity," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 2-34, February.
    3. Solan, Eilon & Zhao, Chang, 2021. "Dynamic monitoring under resource constraints," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 476-491.
    4. Jan Eeckhout & Nicola Persico & Petra E. Todd, 2010. "A Theory of Optimal Random Crackdowns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 1104-1135, June.
    5. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    6. Sutton, John, 2012. "Competing in Capabilities: The Globalization Process," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199274536.
    7. Edward P. Lazear, 2006. "Speeding, Terrorism, and Teaching to the Test," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(3), pages 1029-1061.
    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. Solan, Eilon & Zhao, Chang, 2021. "Dynamic monitoring under resource constraints," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 476-491.
    2. Andrei Barbos, 2022. "Optimal contracts with random monitoring," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(1), pages 119-154, March.
    3. Zhixin Dai & Fabio Galeotti & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "The efficiency of crackdowns: a lab-in-the-field experiment in public transportations," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(2), pages 249-271, February.
    4. Hillberry, Russell & Karabay, Bilgehan & Tan, Shawn W., 2022. "Risk management in border inspection," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Buechel, Berno & Feess, Eberhard & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2020. "Optimal law enforcement with sophisticated and naïve offenders," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 836-857.
    6. Zhixin Dai & Fabio Galeotti & Marie Claire Villeval, 2017. "The efficiency of crackdowns. An experiment in public transportations," Post-Print halshs-01335686, HAL.
    7. Leshem, Shmuel & Tabbach, Avraham, 2023. "The option value of record-based sanctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 1-22.
    8. Evan M. Calford & Gregory DeAngelo, 2023. "Ambiguity and enforcement," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 304-338, April.
    9. Dechenaux, Emmanuel & Samuel, Andrew, 2014. "Announced vs. surprise inspections with tipping-off," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 167-183.
    10. Jessica Birkholz & Jarina Kühn, 2021. "Entrepreneurship Perception during the first COVID-19 Shock: Mental Representations of Entrepreneurship and Preferences of Business Models during the Pandemic," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2105, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    11. Mariani, Marcello M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2020. "Exploring how consumer goods companies innovate in the digital age: The role of big data analytics companies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 338-352.
    12. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Sheila Walsh & Cuiwen Li & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Exploring technology business incubators and their business incubation models: case studies from China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 90-116, February.
    13. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    14. Tomasz Helbin & Amy Van Looy, 2021. "Is Business Process Management (BPM) Ready for Ambidexterity? Conceptualization, Implementation Guidelines and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    15. González-Uribe, Juanita & Reyes, Santiago, 2021. "Identifying and boosting “Gazelles”: Evidence from business accelerators," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 260-287.
    16. Bram Klievink & Bart-Jan Romijn & Scott Cunningham & Hans Bruijn, 2017. "Big data in the public sector: Uncertainties and readiness," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 267-283, April.
    17. Tarifa Fernández, Jorge & de Burgos Jiménez, Jerónimo & Céspedes Lorente, José Joaquín, 2018. "Absorptive capacity as a confounder of the process of supply chain integration," MPRA Paper 120125, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2018.
    18. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Post-Print halshs-03718851, HAL.
    19. Eren Durmus Ozdemir & Saime Mecikoglu, 2016. "A Case Study on Performance Implications of Hybrid Strategy in Automotive Supplier Industry," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(6), pages 31-43, June.
    20. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:3:p:1703-1713. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.