IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2301.00410.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing organizations for bottom-up task allocation: The role of incentives

Author

Listed:
  • Stephan Leitner

Abstract

In recent years, various decentralized organizational forms have emerged, posing a challenge for organizational design. Some design elements, such as task allocation, become emergent properties that cannot be fully controlled from the top down. The central question that arises in this context is: How can bottom-up task allocation be guided towards an effective organizational structure? To address this question, this paper presents a novel agent-based model of an organization that features bottom-up task allocation that can be motivated by either long-term or short-term orientation on the agents' side. The model also includes an incentive mechanism to guide the bottom-up task allocation process and create incentives that range from altruistic to individualistic. Our analysis shows that when bottom-up task allocation is driven by short-term orientation and aligned with the incentive mechanisms, it leads to improved organizational performance that surpasses that of traditionally designed organizations. Additionally, we find that the presence of altruistic incentive mechanisms within the organization reduces the importance of mirroring in task allocation.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephan Leitner, 2023. "Designing organizations for bottom-up task allocation: The role of incentives," Papers 2301.00410, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2301.00410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.00410
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 159-181, Summer.
    2. Falk, Armin & Fischbacher, Urs, 2006. "A theory of reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 293-315, February.
    3. Uri Gneezy & Stephan Meier & Pedro Rey-Biel, 2011. "When and Why Incentives (Don't) Work to Modify Behavior," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 191-210, Fall.
    4. Lyra J. Colfer & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2016. "The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence, and exceptions," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(5), pages 709-738.
    5. Richard N. Langlois, 2002. "Modularity in Technology and Organization," Chapters, in: Nicolai J. Foss & Peter G. Klein (ed.), Entrepreneurship and the Firm, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Herbert A. Simon, 1967. "The BUSINESS SCHOOL A PROBLEM IN ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Stephan Leitner, 2022. "Collaborative search and autonomous task allocation in organizations of learning agents," Papers 2206.02142, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    8. Richard M. Burton & Dorthe Døjbak Håkonsson & Jackson Nickerson & Phanish Puranam & Maciej Workiewicz & Todd Zenger, 2017. "GitHub: exploring the space between boss-less and hierarchical forms of organizing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 6(1), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Margaret A. Meyer, 1994. "The Dynamics of Learning with Team Production: Implications for Task Assignment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 1157-1184.
    10. Jaime Ortega, 2001. "Job Rotation as a Learning Mechanism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(10), pages 1361-1370, October.
    11. Henk W. Volberda & Arie Y. Lewin, 2003. "Co‐evolutionary Dynamics Within and Between Firms: From Evolution to Co‐evolution," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(8), pages 2111-2136, December.
    12. Alfred D. Chandler, 1969. "Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the American Industrial Enterprise," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262530090, December.
    13. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1979. "Job Matching and the Theory of Turnover," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(5), pages 972-990, October.
    14. Jay R. Galbraith, 1974. "Organization Design: An Information Processing View," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 28-36, May.
    15. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    16. Paul Fischer & Steven Huddart, 2008. "Optimal Contracting with Endogenous Social Norms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1459-1475, September.
    17. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2006. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism - Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity and Altruism, in: S. Kolm & Jean Mercier Ythier (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 615-691, Elsevier.
    18. 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.
    19. Helmy H. Baligh & Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 1996. "Organizational Consultant: Creating a Useable Theory for Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1648-1662, December.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.
    22. Ma, Tieju & Nakamori, Yoshiteru, 2005. "Agent-based modeling on technological innovation as an evolutionary process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(3), pages 741-755, November.
    23. Good, Matthew & Knockaert, Mirjam & Soppe, Birthe & Wright, Mike, 2019. "The technology transfer ecosystem in academia. An organizational design perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 82, pages 35-50.
    24. Jiang Wei & Yang Yang & Sali Li, 2021. "Mirror or no mirror? Architectural design of cross-border integration of Chinese multinational enterprises," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1399-1430, December.
    25. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    26. 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.
    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. Stephan Leitner, 2023. "Building resilient organizations: The roles of top-down vs. bottom-up organizing," Papers 2305.07352, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.

    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. Johann Peter & Benedikt Alexander, 2023. "Exploring the structure of internal combustion engine and battery electric vehicles: implications for the architecture of the automotive industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 32(1), pages 129-154.
    2. Simge Tuna & Stefano Brusoni & Anja Schulze, 2019. "Architectural knowledge generation: evidence from a field study," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 28(5), pages 977-1009.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Elia, Stefano & Massini, Silvia & Narula, Rajneesh, 2019. "Disintegration, modularity and entry mode choice: Mirroring technical and organizational architectures in business functions offshoring," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 417-431.
    6. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    7. 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.
    8. Jiang Wei & Yang Yang & Sali Li, 2021. "Mirror or no mirror? Architectural design of cross-border integration of Chinese multinational enterprises," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1399-1430, December.
    9. Meissner, Dirk & Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter & Sarpong, David & Bach, Norbert, 2021. "Understanding cross border innovation activities: The linkages between innovation modes, product architecture and firm boundaries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 762-769.
    10. Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria & Gonçalves, Ricardo & Sousa, Rui, 2023. "Governance of new product design: The influence of national institutions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    11. Yurong Chen, 2017. "What is behind mirroring hypothesis? Dynamics between modularity and integration in the market creation: case from electric vehicle industry," Post-Print hal-01655962, HAL.
    12. Stefano Brusoni & Joachim Henkel & Michael G Jacobides & Samina Karim & Alan Mac & Phanish Puranam & Melissa Schilling, 2023. "The power of modularity today: 20 years of “Design Rules”," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 32(1), pages 1-10.
    13. 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.
    14. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.
    15. 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.
    16. Arash Najmaei, 2016. "Revisiting The Modularity-Performance Nexus: Business Model Innovation As A Missing Mechanism," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(07), pages 1-41, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Giovanna Devetag & Enrico Zaninotto, 2001. "The imperfect hiding: Some introductory concepts and preliminary issues on modularity," ROCK Working Papers 010, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 13 Jun 2008.
    19. Félicia Saïah & Diego Vega & Harwin de Vries & Joakim Kembro, 2023. "Process modularity, supply chain responsiveness, and moderators: The Médecins Sans Frontières response to the Covid‐19 pandemic," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(5), pages 1490-1511, May.
    20. Daniel Woods & Maroš Servátka, 2019. "Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 506-529, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2301.00410. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.