IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jacrfn/v10y1997i2p24-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management Fads And Organizational Architecture

Author

Listed:
  • James A. Brickley
  • Clifford W. Smith
  • Jerold L. Zimmerman

Abstract

This article applies and extends the three‐part organizational framework used in the preceding article to a broad range of management innovations. After furnishing some interesting evidence of the rise and fall of management techniques such as TQM, Reengineering, Just‐in‐Time Production, and Activity‐Based Costing, the authors raise and then attempt to answer a number of questions: What explains the popularity of these management innovations? Why do they often fail to produce the expected benefits? How can managers tell if a particular technique is right for them? What can managers do to increase the likelihood that an adopted technique will be successful? The persistent, and at times seemingly insatiable, corporate demand for management innovations is viewed by the authors as a “rational” economic response by senior managers to major changes in the external business environment—changes that in turn dictate changes in business strategy. For example, when confronted with external changes such as deregulation or heightened global competition, companies often find it necessary to refocus their efforts on improving product quality and operating efficiency. And such changes in business strategy tend to require a revamping of the three critical components of organizational architecture: (1) assignment of decision rights, (2) performance evaluation systems, and (3) compensation systems. As the authors argue, innovations such as TQM, outsourcing, Re‐engineering, and JIT typically involve major changes in just one or two of these critical elements of the organization, but not all three. The failure to coordinate organizational changes in such a way that these three elements are mutually consistent and reinforcing is one important reason why management innovations can fail to meet expectations. The framework described in this article is designed to help managers considering one potentially valuable set of organizational changes to identify other facets of the organization that also require attention and perhaps complementary adjustments.

Suggested Citation

  • James A. Brickley & Clifford W. Smith & Jerold L. Zimmerman, 1997. "Management Fads And Organizational Architecture," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 10(2), pages 24-39, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jacrfn:v:10:y:1997:i:2:p:24-39
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6622.1997.tb00134.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6622.1997.tb00134.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1745-6622.1997.tb00134.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Youssef Fahmi, 2002. "Contribution à une théorie de la gestion de la qualité totale: les déterminants de l'efficacité," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 5(3), pages 115-140, September.
    2. Ryan Federo & Angel Saz-Carranza & Xavier Fernandez-í-Marin & Carlos Losada, 2023. "CEO selection in intergovernmental organizations: the clash between control and efficiency in governance," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(1), pages 155-180, March.
    3. Céline Chatelin, 2003. "Privatization of Air France:A Test of The Stakeholder Corporate Governance Theory;La privatisation d'Air France : un test de la théorie de la gouvernance partenariale," Working Papers CREGO 1030103, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    4. Ittner, Christopher D. & Larcker, David F., 2001. "Assessing empirical research in managerial accounting: a value-based management perspective," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-3), pages 349-410, December.
    5. Céline Chatelin, 2003. "Stakeholder Governance and Organizational Performance: Lessons from past privatizations;Gouvernance partenariale et performance organisationnelle:les enseignements des privatisations passées," Working Papers CREGO 1030102, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    6. Ralph C. Kimball, 1998. "Economic profit and performance measurement in banking," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Jul, pages 35-53.
    7. Céline Chatelin, 2002. "Quels enjeux théoriques et méthodologiques de la théorie de la gouvernance partenariale ? La privatisation comme illustration," Working Papers 2002-5, Laboratoire Orléanais de Gestion - université d'Orléans.
    8. Gérard Charreaux, 2000. "L'approche économico-financière de l'investissement: une vision critique," Working Papers CREGO 1000501, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    9. Céline Chatelin, 2003. "Privatization and Stakeholder Governance:Theoretical and Methodological issues;Privatisation et gouvernance partenariale enjeux théoriques et méthodologiques," Working Papers CREGO 1030101, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    10. Ghazi Zouari, 2011. "Specific knowledge, investment decision and organizational architecture," Working Papers CREGO 1110501, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    11. Thi Cam Tu Luong & Ann Jorissen & Ine Paeleman, 2019. "Performance Measurement for Sustainability: Does Firm Ownership Matter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-35, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jacrfn:v:10:y:1997:i:2:p:24-39. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1078-1196 .

    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.