IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v23y2012i3p686-703.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Cabigiosu

    (Department of Economics, University of Padova, 35123 Padova, Italy)

  • Arnaldo Camuffo

    (Department of Management and Technology and Center for Research on Organization and Management, Bocconi University, 20135 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

This study explores whether, to what extent, and under which conditions modular products are associated with modular organizations (the “mirroring” hypothesis). We analyze the product and organizational architectures of three firms in the air conditioning industry through an original data set of 100 components and supply relationships. Applying a variety of regression methods, we show that, under the condition of product architecture stability at the component level , supplier relations for loosely coupled components are characterized by less information sharing, which implies that the degree of coupling of product components varies directly with the degree of coupling of organizations (the “mirroring” hypothesis). Also, the performance of supply relationships depends on the amount of buyer–supplier information sharing but not on the degree of component modularity, which supports the relational view and confirms that product modularity does not have unambiguous effects on organizational performance. Moreover, the degree of component modularity negatively moderates the impact of buyer–supplier information sharing on supplier-relationship performance, which confirms that component modularity works as an ex ante, embedded substitute for high-powered interorganizational integration mechanisms. Finally, contingent on firms' strategies, organizational structures, and capabilities, we argue that at the firm level , higher product modularity may be associated either with less information sharing with suppliers, which implies that the mirroring effect might hold also at the firm level, or with more information sharing with suppliers, which implies that there may be increasing returns to modularity in design efforts because of interorganizational integration (the “complementarity” hypothesis).

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Cabigiosu & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2012. "Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 686-703, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:23:y:2012:i:3:p:686-703
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0655
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0655
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1110.0655?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. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1995. "Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 93-109.
    2. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
    3. M. Bensaou & Erin Anderson, 1999. "Buyer-Supplier Relations in Industrial Markets: When Do Buyers Risk Making Idiosyncratic Investments?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 460-481, August.
    4. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2008. "How Does Outsourcing Affect Performance Dynamics? Evidence from the Automobile Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(12), pages 1963-1979, December.
    5. Richard N. Langlois, 2003. "The vanishing hand: the changing dynamics of industrial capitalism," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(2), pages 351-385, April.
    6. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    7. Amrit Tiwana, 2008. "Does technological modularity substitute for control? A study of alliance performance in software outsourcing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(7), pages 769-780, July.
    8. Lyra J. Colfer & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2010. "The Mirroring Hypothesis: Theory, Evidence and Exceptions," Harvard Business School Working Papers 10-058, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2010.
    9. Langlois, Richard N. & Robertson, Paul L., 1992. "Networks and innovation in a modular system: Lessons from the microcomputer and stereo component industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 297-313, August.
    10. Helper, Susan & MacDuffie, John Paul & Sabel, Charles, 2000. "Pragmatic Collaborations: Advancing Knowledge While Controlling Opportunism," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 9(3), pages 443-487, September.
    11. Pimmler, Thomas U. (Thomas Udo) & Eppinger, Steven D., 1994. "Integration analysis of product decompositions," Working papers 3690-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Robert M. Grant, 1996. "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 375-387, August.
    13. George Baker & Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 2002. "Relational Contracts and the Theory of the Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(1), pages 39-84.
    14. Glenn Hoetker & Anand Swaminathan & Will Mitchell, 2007. "Modularity and the Impact of Buyer-Supplier Relationships on the Survival of Suppliers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 178-191, February.
    15. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow, 2007. "Does Transaction Misalignment Matter for Firm Survival at All Stages of the Industry Life Cycle?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1332-1344, August.
    16. Kyle J. Mayer & Nicholas S. Argyres, 2004. "Learning to Contract: Evidence from the Personal Computer Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 394-410, August.
    17. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    18. Paulo J. Gomes & Nitin R. Joglekar, 2008. "Linking modularity with problem solving and coordination efforts," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(5), pages 443-457.
    19. Lau Antonio, K.W. & Yam, Richard C.M. & Tang, Esther, 2007. "The impacts of product modularity on competitive capabilities and performance: An empirical study," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 1-20, January.
    20. Klein, Benjamin & Crawford, Robert G & Alchian, Armen A, 1978. "Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(2), pages 297-326, October.
    21. Nicholas S. Argyres, 1999. "The Impact of Information Technology on Coordination: Evidence from the B-2 “Stealth” Bomber," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 162-180, April.
    22. Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "Do Modular Products Lead to Modular Organizations?," Working Papers 02-0130, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    23. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    24. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow, 2010. "Innovation, Modularity, and Vertical Deintegration: Evidence from the Early U.S. Auto Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 842-853, August.
    25. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal & Rishi R. Roy, 2008. "The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 939-955, May.
    26. Anne Parmigiani & Will Mitchell, 2009. "Complementarity, capabilities, and the boundaries of the firm: the impact of within‐firm and interfirm expertise on concurrent sourcing of complementary components," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(10), pages 1065-1091, October.
    27. M. Bensaou & N. Venkatraman, 1995. "Configurations of Interorganizational Relationships: A Comparison Between U.S. and Japanese Automakers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(9), pages 1471-1492, September.
    28. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-528, June.
    29. Brusoni, Stefano & Prencipe, Andrea, 2001. "Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(1), pages 179-205, March.
    30. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    31. Arnaldo Camuffo & Andrea Furlan & Enrico Rettore, 2007. "Risk sharing in supplier relations: an agency model for the Italian air‐conditioning industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(12), pages 1257-1266, December.
    32. Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2008. "Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(1), pages 155-195, February.
    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. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    2. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    3. Andreas Reinstaller, 2011. "The Modularity of Technology and Organisations. Implications for the Theory of the Firm," WIFO Working Papers 398, WIFO.
    4. Sanchez, Ron & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2012. "Modularity and Economic Organization: Concepts, Theory, Observations, and Predictions," Working Papers 12-0101, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    5. Andreas Reinstaller, 2012. "Modularity and its Implications for the Theory of the Firm," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Ron Sanchez & Joseph T. Mahoney, 2013. "Modularity and economic organization: concepts, theory, observations, and predictions," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    8. Jaegul Lee & Nicholas Berente, 2012. "Digital Innovation and the Division of Innovative Labor: Digital Controls in the Automotive Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1428-1447, October.
    9. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2022. "The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 1056-1085.
    10. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.
    11. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    12. Cheng, Liang-Chieh (Victor), 2011. "Assessing performance of utilizing organizational modularity to manage supply chains: Evidence in the US manufacturing sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 736-746, June.
    13. Gang Zhang & Ruoyang Gao, 2010. "Modularity and incremental innovation: the roles of design rules and organizational communication," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 171-200, June.
    14. Tee, Richard & Davies, Andrew & Whyte, Jennifer, 2019. "Modular designs and integrating practices: Managing collaboration through coordination and cooperation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 51-61.
    15. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Joachim Henkel, 2015. "Modularity and intellectual property protection," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(11), pages 1637-1655, November.
    16. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2009. "Complementarity Among Vertical Integration Decisions: Evidence from Automobile Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 311-332, February.
    17. Susan Helper & Mari Sako, 2010. "Management innovation in supply chain: appreciating Chandler in the twenty-first century," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(2), pages 399-429, April.
    18. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    19. Dewen Yao, 2013. "Understanding Industrial Innovation and Upgrade from Modularization’s Perspective," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 3(6), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Kwak, Kiho & Kim, Namil, 2022. "Industrial Leadership Changes without Technological Discontinuity: Modularization, Institution-Led Market Discontinuity, and Market Development Strategy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).

    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:ororsc:v:23:y:2012:i:3:p:686-703. 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.