IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/manint/v51y2011i4d10.1007_s11575-011-0084-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How German, Japanese, and U.S. Executives View Markets and Planning as Alternative Coordinating Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • William G. Egelhoff

    (Fordham University)

  • Erich Frese

    (University of Cologne)

Abstract

Markets and central planning are alternative mechanisms for coordinating economic activity within economies and firms. A multi-level economics literature describes and contrasts the coordinating characteristics of markets and planning. While it assumes these characteristics reflect the perceptions and decisions of economic actors, this behavioural assumption has not been tested. Based on the literature, the study develops hypotheses specifying how executives will perceive the coordinating characteristics of markets and planning. Using existing theory about individualism-collectivism, the study further hypotheses how the perceptions are likely to vary between individualistic and collectivistic cultures. When tested with a sample of top German, Japanese, and U.S. executives, the results, with two exceptions, support the hypotheses. Going beyond the hypotheses, the study explores the preferences and underlying logic of executives across nationalities. German and U.S. executives share a similar cognitive structure. Japanese executives exhibit a different cognitive structure which reflects a more collectivistic culture. The study emphasizes the importance of testing the basic behavioural assumptions of economics and the need to consider culture a potential moderator of such assumptions.

Suggested Citation

  • William G. Egelhoff & Erich Frese, 2011. "How German, Japanese, and U.S. Executives View Markets and Planning as Alternative Coordinating Mechanisms," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 511-532, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:manint:v:51:y:2011:i:4:d:10.1007_s11575-011-0084-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11575-011-0084-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11575-011-0084-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11575-011-0084-1?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. Jean-Francois Hennart, 1993. "Explaining the Swollen Middle: Why Most Transactions Are a Mix of “Market” and “Hierarchy”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 529-547, November.
    2. Todd Zenger, 2002. "Crafting Internal Hybrids: Complementarities, Common Change Initiatives, and the Team-Based Organization," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 79-95.
    3. William G. Ouchi, 1979. "A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(9), pages 833-848, September.
    4. Demsetz, Harold, 1988. "The Theory of the Firm Revisited," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 141-161, Spring.
    5. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 1985. "Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 134-149, 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. Mahoney, Joseph T. & McNally, Regina C., 2004. "Explaining and Predicting the Choice of Organizational Form: Integrating Performance Ambiguity and Asset Specificity Effects," Working Papers 04-0109, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    2. Jack A. Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2002. "Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 547-566, October.
    3. Yu, Chwo-Ming Joseph & Wong, Huang-Che & Chiao, Yu-Ching, 2006. "Local linkages and their effects on headquarters' use of process controls," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(12), pages 1239-1247, November.
    4. King, William R. & Marks, Peter Jr., 2008. "Motivating knowledge sharing through a knowledge management system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 131-146, February.
    5. Jochen Schweitzer, 2016. "How Contracts And Culture Mediate Joint Transactions Of Innovation Partnerships," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(01), pages 1-33, January.
    6. Per Erik Eriksson, 2006. "Procurement and Governance Management ? Development of a Conceptual Procurement Model Based on Different Types of Control," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 17(1), pages 30-49.
    7. Markus Mayer & Markus Voeth, 2022. "Improving negotiation success in B2B sales organizations: is structured negotiation management a success factor?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 163-196, February.
    8. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    9. Mei, Maggie Qiuzhu & Wang, Le & Yan, Jie, 2023. "Maintaining product quality consistency when offshoring to emerging markets: The role of subsidiary control," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(1).
    10. Emil Inauen & Katja Rost & Margit Osterloh & Bruno S. Frey, 2010. "Back to the Future –A Monastic Perspective on Corporate Governance," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 21(1), pages 38-59.
    11. Yasemin Kor & Joseph Mahoney & Sharon Watson, 2008. "The effects of demand, competitive, and technological uncertainty on board monitoring and institutional ownership of IPO firms," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 12(3), pages 239-259, August.
    12. Anja Schulze & Stefano Brusoni, 2022. "How dynamic capabilities change ordinary capabilities: Reconnecting attention control and problem‐solving," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2447-2477, December.
    13. Gatignon, Aline & Gatignon, Hubert, 2010. "Erin Anderson and the Path Breaking Work of TCE in New Areas of Business Research: Transaction Costs in Action," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 232-247.
    14. Williams, Christopher & van Triest, Sander, 2009. "The impact of corporate and national cultures on decentralization in multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 156-167, April.
    15. Ranjith Appuhami & Sujatha Perera & Hector Perera, 2011. "Management Controls in Public–Private Partnerships: An Analytical Framework," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 21(1), pages 64-79, March.
    16. Stephen K. Kim & Amrit Tiwana, 2016. "Chicken or egg? Sequential complementarity among salesforce control mechanisms," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 316-333, May.
    17. Sandeep Rustagi & William R. King & Laurie J. Kirsch, 2008. "Predictors of Formal Control Usage in IT Outsourcing Partnerships," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 126-143, June.
    18. Christian Jung-Gehling & Erik Strauss, 2018. "A Contemporary Concept of Organizational Control: Its Dependence on Shared Values and Impact on Motivation," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 70(4), pages 341-374, November.
    19. Rob Gleasure & Kieran Conboy & Lorraine Morgan, 2019. "Talking Up a Storm: How Backers Use Public Discourse to Exert Control in Crowdfunded Systems Development Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 447-465, June.
    20. Johnson, William H.A., 2011. "Managing university technology development using organizational control theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 842-852, July.

    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:manint:v:51:y:2011:i:4:d:10.1007_s11575-011-0084-1. 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.