IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/illbus/02-0130.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Modular Products Lead to Modular Organizations?

Author

Listed:
  • Hoetker, Glenn

    (U of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

Abstract

The tacit assumption that increased product modularity is associated with advantageous increases in organizational modularity underlies much of the literature on modularity. Previous empirical investigations of this assumption, few in number, have faced numerous confounding factors and generated conflicting results. I build a causal model for the relationship between product and organizational modularity, which I test using a distinctive empirical setting that controls for confounding factors present in previous studies. I find support for only part of the assumed relationship, showing that modularity is a more multi-faceted concept than previously recognized. In particular, increased product modularity enhances reconfigurability of organizations more quickly than it allows firms to move activities out of hierarchy. The paper contributes to the emerging stream of research that focuses on the previously under-appreciated costs of designing and maintaining a modular organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoetker, Glenn, 2002. "Do Modular Products Lead to Modular Organizations?," Working Papers 02-0130, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:illbus:02-0130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.business.illinois.edu/Working_Papers/papers/02-0130.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 7741, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 1995. "Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 93-109.
    3. Jeffrey H. Dyer, 1997. "Effective interim collaboration: how firms minimize transaction costs and maximise transaction value," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 535-556, August.
    4. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    5. David J. Teece, 2008. "Technology Transfer By Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost Of Transferring Technological Know-How," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 1, pages 1-22, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    7. Peter J. Buckley & Mark Casson, 1991. "The Future of the Multinational Enterprise," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, edition 0, number 978-1-349-21204-0, October.
    8. Williamson, Oliver E, 1979. "Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractural Relations," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 233-261, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Paul Almeida & Jaeyong Song & Robert M. Grant, 2002. "Are Firms Superior to Alliances and Markets? An Empirical Test of Cross-Border Knowledge Building," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 147-161, April.
    11. Keith J. Crocker & Kenneth J. Reynolds, 1993. "The Efficiency of Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis of Air Force Engine Procurement," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(1), pages 126-146, Spring.
    12. David J. Teece & Richard Rumelt & Giovanni Dosi & Sidney Winter, 2000. "Understanding Corporate Coherence: Theory and Evidence," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 9, pages 264-293, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Pisano, Gary P, 1989. "Using Equity Participation to Support Exchange: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 109-126, Spring.
    14. Klein, Benjamin, 1980. "Transaction Cost Determinants of "Unfair" Contractual Arrangements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 356-362, May.
    15. Brusoni, Stefano & Prencipe, Andrea, 2001. "Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(1), pages 179-205, March.
    16. Ron Sanchez, 1995. "Strategic flexibility in product competition," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(S1), pages 135-159.
    17. Akira Takeishi, 2002. "Knowledge Partitioning in the Interfirm Division of Labor: The Case of Automotive Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 321-338, June.
    18. Putterman, Louis, 1995. "Markets, hierarchies, and information: On a paradox in the economics of organization," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 373-390, May.
    19. H. B. Malmgren, 1961. "Information, Expectations and the Theory of the Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(3), pages 399-421.
    20. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    21. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    22. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    23. Adrian C. Darnell, 1994. "A Dictionary Of Econometrics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 118.
    24. Masten, Scott E, 1984. "The Organization of Production: Evidence from the Aerospace Industry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 403-417, October.
    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. Kannan Srikanth & Phanish Puranam, 2014. "The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1253-1271, August.
    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. Reuer, Jeffrey J. & Ariño, Africa, 2002. "Contractual heterogeneity in strategic alliances," IESE Research Papers D/482, IESE Business School.
    4. Timothy Bresnahan & Jonathan Levin, 2012. "Vertical Integration and Market Structure [The Handbook of Organizational Economics]," Introductory Chapters,, Princeton University Press.
    5. 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.
    6. Heather Berry, 2023. "Diverse knowledge exploration and diffusion in MNCs," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(7), pages 1589-1615, July.
    7. Stefano Brusoni & Keith Pavitt, 2003. "Problem solving and the co-ordination of innovative activities," SPRU Working Paper Series 93, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    8. Elaine Mosakowski & Srilata Zaheer, 1999. "The Global Configuration of a Speculative Trading Operation: An Empirical Study of Foreign Exchange Trading," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 401-423, August.
    9. Dosi Giovanni & Gambardella Alfonso & Grazzi Marco & Orsenigo Luigi, 2008. "Technological Revolutions and the Evolution of Industrial Structures: Assessing the Impact of New Technologies upon the Size and Boundaries of Firms," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-49, June.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Ali A. Yassine & Luke A. Wissmann, 2007. "The Implications of Product Architecture on the Firm," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 118-137, June.
    13. Stefano Brusoni & Andrea Prencipe, 2006. "Making Design Rules: A Multidomain Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 179-189, April.
    14. Reuer, Jeffrey & Devarakonda, S.V., 2015. "Mechanisms of hybrid governance : Administrative committees in non-equity alliances," Other publications TiSEM 063d9ccc-59c8-4e76-a77d-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    16. Duysters, G.M. & Heimeriks, K.H., 2002. "The influence of alliance capabilities on alliance performance: an empirical investigation," Working Papers 02.08, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    17. Sanchez, Ron & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2012. "Modularity and Economic Organization: Concepts, Theory, Observations, and Predictions," Working Papers 12-0101, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    18. 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.
    19. Ariño, Africa & Reuer, Jeffrey J., 2004. "Alliance contractual design," IESE Research Papers D/572, IESE Business School.
    20. Sharon Novak & Scott Stern, 2009. "Complementarity Among Vertical Integration Decisions: Evidence from Automobile Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 311-332, February.

    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:ecl:illbus:02-0130. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbuiuus.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.