IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/futbus/v10y2024i1d10.1186_s43093-024-00330-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unnecessary organizational burden: a conceptual framework

Author

Listed:
  • Oren Ginzburg

    (Universiteit Antwerpen/Antwerp Management School
    Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Stefanie Weil

    (Universiteit Antwerpen/Antwerp Management School)

  • Arjen Witteloostuijn

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

Abstract

This paper investigates the mechanisms that lead organizations to impose unnecessary burdens on their actors. The prevailing narrative in the literature is that unnecessary organizational burden (UOB) is created either on purpose—as a way for an organizational actor to assert control—or inadvertently through the passage of time as layers of policies, rules, and processes accumulate. Based on a wide review of relevant literature, we propose a different explanation: in our conceptual framework, the onset and mitigation of unnecessary burdens are explained, respectively, by organizational decision-makers’ weaknesses and strengths. Our framework combines (1) a typology of unnecessary burdens with (2) a typology of factors influencing the likelihood of UOB mitigation, and (3) a typology of managerial mitigation responses to such burdens. The conceptual framework, and a series of 12 propositions, aim to offer researchers and practitioners a shared language to empirically investigate unnecessary organizational burden, and implement effective solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Oren Ginzburg & Stefanie Weil & Arjen Witteloostuijn, 2024. "Unnecessary organizational burden: a conceptual framework," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:futbus:v:10:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1186_s43093-024-00330-8
    DOI: 10.1186/s43093-024-00330-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s43093-024-00330-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s43093-024-00330-8?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bachmann, Miriam & Kurzmann, Anne & Gutierrez, Barbara Castrellon & Neyer, Anne-Katrin, 2020. "The Paradox of Agility: Reduce Formalization? Introduce Formalization!," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 74(2), pages 122-135.
    2. Magdalena Soffia & Alex J Wood & Brendan Burchell, 2022. "Alienation Is Not ‘Bullshit’: An Empirical Critique of Graeber’s Theory of BS Jobs," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 36(5), pages 816-840, October.
    3. Royston Greenwood & Amalia Magán Díaz & Stan Xiao Li & José Céspedes Lorente, 2010. "The Multiplicity of Institutional Logics and the Heterogeneity of Organizational Responses," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 521-539, April.
    4. Rik Peeters & Humberto Trujillo Jiménez & Elizabeth O'Connor & Pascual Ogarrio Rojas & Michele González Galindo & Daniela Morales Tenorio, 2018. "Low†trust bureaucracy: Understanding the Mexican bureaucratic experience," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(2), pages 65-74, May.
    5. Zeckhauser, Richard, 2021. "Strategic sorting: the role of ordeals in health care," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 64-81, March.
    6. Virginie Svenningsen-Berthélem & Eva Boxenbaum & Davide Ravasi, 2018. "Individual responses to multiple logics in hybrid organizing: The role of structural position," Post-Print hal-02737160, HAL.
    7. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    8. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    9. Michael T. Hannan & László Pólos & Glenn R. Carroll, 2003. "Cascading Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(5), pages 463-482, October.
    10. Kim, Andrea & Kim, Youngsang & Cho, Younsung, 2023. "The consequences of collaborative overload: A long-term investigation of helping behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    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. Priyono Anjar & Nursyamsiah Siti & Darmawan Baziedy A., 2019. "Managing ambidexterity in internationalisation of SMEs from an emerging country: A dynamic capability perspective," HOLISTICA – Journal of Business and Public Administration, Sciendo, vol. 10(3), pages 7-26, December.
    2. Songsong Cheng & Qunpeng Fan & Yang Song, 2023. "Performance Gap and Innovation Ambidexterity: A Moderated Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, February.
    3. Zhou, Lianxi & Xu, Shou-Ren & Xu, Hui & Barnes, Bradley R., 2020. "Unleashing the dynamics of product-market ambidexterity in the pursuit of international opportunities: Insights from emerging market firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6).
    4. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Hughes, Paul & Hughes, Matthew & Stokes, Peter & Lee, Hanna & Rodgers, Peter & Degbey, William Y., 2020. "Micro-foundations of organizational ambidexterity in the context of cross-border mergers and acquisitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Juan A. Martínez-Román & Javier Gamero & Juan A. Tamayo & María de Loreto Delgado-González, 2025. "Empirical analysis of the technological exploration–exploitation balance and its impact on organizational performance under uncertainty," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Joanna Radomska & Przemysław Wołczek, 2020. "Integrative Perspective on Ambidexterity, Creativity and Networking: Literature Overview," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3), pages 31-49.
    8. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    9. Matthews, Lane & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Zhou, Dan, 2022. "Paradoxical transparency? Capital market responses to exploration and exploitation disclosure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    10. Céline Bérard & Marc Fréchet, 2020. "Organizational antecedents of exploration and exploitation in SMEs: The role of structural and resource attributes," Post-Print halshs-02570775, HAL.
    11. Lulu Liu & Fengbin Wang & Xiukun Li, 2019. "Comparing the configured causal antecedents of exploration and exploitation: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    12. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    13. Campbell, Robert J. & Short, Cole E. & Graffin, Scott D., 2025. "Balancing the radical and the incremental: CEO affiliative humor and organizational ambidexterity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    14. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, December.
    15. Worren, Nicolay, 2016. "Operationalizing the concept of conflicting functional demands," Working Paper Series 04-2016, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, School of Economics and Business.
    16. Wenke, Kathrin & Zapkau, Florian B. & Schwens, Christian, 2021. "Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 653-665.
    17. Nan Wang & Baolian Chen & Liya Wang & Zhenzhong Ma & Shan Pan, 2024. "Big data analytics capability and social innovation: the mediating role of knowledge exploration and exploitation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2023. "Effects of ambidextrous and specialized R&D strategies on firm performance: The contingent role of industry orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    19. Shashi, & Centobelli, Piera & Cerchione, Roberto & Singh, Rajwinder, 2019. "The impact of leanness and innovativeness on environmental and financial performance: Insights from Indian SMEs," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 111-124.
    20. Bernard J. Jaworski, 2021. "Netflix: Reinvention across multiple time periods," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(1), pages 180-193, June.

    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:spr:futbus:v:10:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1186_s43093-024-00330-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.