IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v25y2014i2p339-355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Autonomy or Control? Organizational Architecture and Corporate Attention to Stakeholders

Author

Listed:
  • Donal Crilly

    (London Business School, London NW1 4SA, United Kingdom)

  • Pamela Sloan

    (HEC Montréal, Montréal, Quebec H3T 2A7, Canada)

Abstract

Existing explanations of corporate attention to stakeholders overlook how organizations distribute the attention of their members. Combining interview and survey data at two levels of analysis, we show that executives’ assumptions about how best to configure their organizations have important implications for how their firms attend to stakeholders. We identify two types of organizational architecture: guided autonomy and cascaded control. The former enables specialized attention at the level of the individual manager and facilitates simultaneous attention to a large number of stakeholders; the latter restricts the autonomy of individual managers and leads to redundancy in attention. Our contribution is a framework that takes account of top manager frames and organizational architecture to articulate the relationship between individual- and organizational-level attention and to explain why some firms can address the concerns of multiple stakeholders simultaneously.

Suggested Citation

  • Donal Crilly & Pamela Sloan, 2014. "Autonomy or Control? Organizational Architecture and Corporate Attention to Stakeholders," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 339-355, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:25:y:2014:i:2:p:339-355
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2013.0849
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0849
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2013.0849?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. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Mary J. Benner & Mary Tripsas, 2012. "The influence of prior industry affiliation on framing in nascent industries: the evolution of digital cameras," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 277-302, March.
    3. Jane E. Dutton & Susan J. Ashford & Regina M. O’ Neill & Erika Hayes & Elizabeth E. Wierba, 1997. "Reading the wind: how middle managers assess the context for selling issues to top managers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 407-423, May.
    4. Martha S. Feldman & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2011. "Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1240-1253, October.
    5. Susan Athey & John Roberts, 2001. "Organizational Design: Decision Rights and Incentive Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 200-205, May.
    6. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 101-122, April.
    7. Sucheta Nadkarni & Pamela S. Barr, 2008. "Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: an integrated view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1395-1427, December.
    8. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    9. Giovanni Gavetti & Daniel Levinthal & William Ocasio, 2007. "Perspective---Neo-Carnegie: The Carnegie School’s Past, Present, and Reconstructing for the Future," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 523-536, June.
    10. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    11. Aleksandra Kacperczyk, 2009. "With greater power comes greater responsibility? takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 261-285, March.
    12. James P. Walsh & Alan D. Meyer & Claudia Bird Schoonhoven, 2006. "A Future for Organization Theory: Living in and Living with Changing Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(5), pages 657-671, October.
    13. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2000. "Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 404-428, August.
    14. Claus Rerup, 2009. "Attentional Triangulation: Learning from Unexpected Rare Crises," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(5), pages 876-893, October.
    15. John Joseph & William Ocasio, 2012. "Architecture, attention, and adaptation in the multibusiness firm: General electric from 1951 to 2001," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 633-660, June.
    16. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    17. Øystein D. Fjeldstad & Charles C. Snow & Raymond E. Miles & Christopher Lettl, 2012. "The architecture of collaboration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 734-750, June.
    18. Cyril Bouquet & Allen Morrison & Julian Birkinshaw, 2009. "International attention and multinational enterprise performance," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 40(1), pages 108-131, January.
    19. Rhonda K. Reger & Timothy B. Palmer, 1996. "Managerial Categorization of Competitors: Using Old Maps to Navigate New Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 22-39, February.
    20. Ranjay Gulati & Phanish Puranam, 2009. "Renewal Through Reorganization: The Value of Inconsistencies Between Formal and Informal Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 422-440, April.
    21. Theresa S. Cho & Donald C. Hambrick, 2006. "Attention as the Mediator Between Top Management Team Characteristics and Strategic Change: The Case of Airline Deregulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 453-469, August.
    22. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, 2006. "Mindfulness and the Quality of Organizational Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 514-524, August.
    23. Giovanni Gavetti, 2005. "Cognition and Hierarchy: Rethinking the Microfoundations of Capabilities’ Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 599-617, December.
    24. Roger L. M. Dunbar & William H. Starbuck, 2006. "Learning to Design Organizations and Learning from Designing Them," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 171-178, April.
    25. Amit Nigam & William Ocasio, 2010. "Event Attention, Environmental Sensemaking, and Change in Institutional Logics: An Inductive Analysis of the Effects of Public Attention to Clinton's Health Care Reform Initiative," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 823-841, August.
    26. Jay R. Galbraith, 1974. "Organization Design: An Information Processing View," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 28-36, May.
    27. Giovanni Gavetti & Jan W. Rivkin, 2007. "On the Origin of Strategy: Action and Cognition over Time," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 420-439, June.
    28. J. P. Eggers & Sarah Kaplan, 2009. "Cognition and Renewal: Comparing CEO and Organizational Effects on Incumbent Adaptation to Technical Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 461-477, April.
    29. Daniel Levinthal & Claus Rerup, 2006. "Crossing an Apparent Chasm: Bridging Mindful and Less-Mindful Perspectives on Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 502-513, August.
    30. Patricia Pitcher & Samia Chreim & Veronika Kisfalvi, 2000. "CEO succession research: methodological bridges over troubled waters," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(6), pages 625-648, June.
    31. Rajshree Agarwal & Jaideep Anand & Janet Bercovitz & Rachel Croson, 2012. "Spillovers across organizational architectures: The role of prior resource allocation and communication in post‐acquisition coordination outcomes," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 710-733, June.
    32. Linda Argote & Henrich R. Greve, 2007. "A Behavioral Theory of the Firm ---40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 337-349, June.
    33. Ranjay Gulati & Phanish Puranam & Michael Tushman, 2012. "Meta‐organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 571-586, June.
    34. Linda Rouleau, 2005. "Micro‐Practices of Strategic Sensemaking and Sensegiving: How Middle Managers Interpret and Sell Change Every Day," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(7), pages 1413-1441, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hall, Matthew & Millo, Yuval & Barman, E, 2015. "Who and what really counts? Stakeholder prioritization and accounting for social value," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62354, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Kleinknecht, Robert & Haq, Hammad Ul & Muller, Alan R. & Kraan, Karolus O., 2020. "An attention-based view of short-termism: The effects of organizational structure," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 244-254.
    3. Blankenburg Holm, Desirée & Drogendijk, Rian & Haq, Hammad ul, 2020. "An attention-based view on managing information processing channels in organizations," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2).
    4. John Joseph & Alex J. Wilson, 2018. "The growth of the firm: An attention‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1779-1800, June.
    5. Andrews, Daniel S. & Fainshmidt, Stav & Ambos, Tina & Haensel, Kira, 2022. "The attention-based view and the multinational corporation: Review and research agenda," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(2).
    6. Hannah Charlotte Joos, 2019. "Influences on managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience: two decades of research in review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 3-37, February.
    7. Emanuele L. M. Bettinazzi & Maurizio Zollo, 2022. "Stakeholder Orientation and Experiential Learning: Evidence from Corporate Acquisitions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1422-1459, September.
    8. Jean‐Pierre Imbrogiano & Elizabeth Nichols, 2021. "How to serve sustainability performance in businesses? An appetizing recipe to link practices to performance in business sustainability research," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1610-1622, May.
    9. Meng Zhao & Xufei Ma & Seung Ho Park & Lingli Luo, 2023. "Attention-Based Constraint to MNC Coevolution in China's Changing Stakeholder Environment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(4), pages 797-814, September.
    10. Conti, Raffaele & Novelli, Elena, 2022. "Not all technologies are created equal for stakeholders: Constituency statutes, firm stakeholder orientation and investments in technology generality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    11. Millo, Yuval & Barman, Emily & Hall, Matthew, 2016. "Accounting measurement tools and their impact on managerial decision making," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 17(2), pages 17-23.
    12. Donal Crilly & Na Ni & Yuwei Jiang, 2016. "Do-no-harm versus do-good social responsibility: Attributional thinking and the liability of foreignness," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1316-1329, July.
    13. Shilpee A. Dasgupta & Mayank Bhatia & Upasana Singh & Arghya Ray, 2022. "Impact of CSR on non-financial performance and the mediating role of trust and reputation: Indian manufacturing employees’ perspectives," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 19(2), pages 391-412, June.

    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. John Joseph & Alex J. Wilson, 2018. "The growth of the firm: An attention‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1779-1800, June.
    2. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    3. van den Oever, Koen, 2017. "Uncharted waters : A behavioral approach to when, why and which organizational changes are adopted," Other publications TiSEM 0136c8c2-ecdd-4f82-8ca7-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Tomi Laamanen, 2019. "Dynamic attention-based view of corporate headquarters in MNCs," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Markku V. J. Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2013. "Top Management’s Attention to Discontinuous Technological Change: Corporate Venture Capital as an Alert Mechanism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 926-947, June.
    6. John Joseph & Ronald Klingebiel & Alex James Wilson, 2016. "Organizational Structure and Performance Feedback: Centralization, Aspirations, and Termination Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1065-1083, October.
    7. Andrews, Daniel S. & Fainshmidt, Stav & Ambos, Tina & Haensel, Kira, 2022. "The attention-based view and the multinational corporation: Review and research agenda," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(2).
    8. Francesco Castellaneta & Maurizio Zollo, 2015. "The Dimensions of Experiential Learning in the Management of Activity Load," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 140-157, February.
    9. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    10. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    11. Riccardo Vecchiato & Giampiero Favato & Francesco di Maddaloni & Hang Do, 2020. "Foresight, cognition, and long‐term performance: Insights from the automotive industry and opportunities for future research," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(1), March.
    12. Daniella Laureiro‐Martínez & Stefano Brusoni, 2018. "Cognitive flexibility and adaptive decision‐making: Evidence from a laboratory study of expert decision makers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 1031-1058, April.
    13. Varshney, Mayank, 2023. "Learning-by-hiring: How do rival firms learn from focal firm's hiring," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    14. Jordi Surroca & Diego Prior & Josep A. Tribó Giné, 2016. "Using panel data dea to measure CEOs' focus of attention: An application to the study of cognitive group membership and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 370-388, February.
    15. Sarah Kaplan & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2013. "Temporal Work in Strategy Making," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 965-995, August.
    16. Guiette, Alain & Vandenbempt, Koen, 2013. "Exploring team mental model dynamics during strategic change implementation in professional service organizations. A sensemaking perspective," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 728-744.
    17. Koichi Nakagawa & Yoichi Matsumoto, 2015. "Issue selection flexibility and strategic rigidity: Lessons from Sharp's crisis," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 15-24, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    18. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    19. Claus Rerup, 2009. "Attentional Triangulation: Learning from Unexpected Rare Crises," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(5), pages 876-893, October.
    20. Carlo Salvato, 2009. "Capabilities Unveiled: The Role of Ordinary Activities in the Evolution of Product Development Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 384-409, April.

    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:25:y:2014:i:2:p:339-355. 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.