All Things Great and Small: Organizational Size, Boundaries of the Firm, and a Changing Environment

Josefy, Matthew; Kuban, Scott; Ireland, R. Duane; Hitt, Michael A.

doi:10.1080/19416520.2015.1027086

Cited by 143 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 280 publications

(264 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Accordingly, other central structural attributes that characterize organizations are strongly influenced by firm size. It is because of this general consensus in the literature about the predictive capacity of firm size (e.g., Child, 1973; for a recent review see Josefy et al, 2015) that we single out this variable. This allows a deeper theoretical exploration of underlying processes based upon which we develop our conceptual model.…”

Section: Firm Size and Organizational Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coordination, in turn, refers to managerial attempts to ensure the efficient and effective operation of the organization's functions in line with its objectives. While some of the extant literature suggests economies of scale in the administrative handling of coordination and control problems -and which explain the nonlinear relationship between firm size and the magnitude of the administrative component -larger organizations require more complex administrative tasks in the form of sophisticated control and coordination systems (Josefy et al, 2015;Kimberly, 1976). This increases the costs of administration, because larger, highly differentiated organizations have a relatively larger administrative component than smaller firms (Kimberly, 1976).…”

Section: Firm Size and Organizational Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Walking and Talking Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications of Firm Size and Organizational Cost

Wickert

Scherer

Spence

2016

J Management Studies

276

253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we address two interrelated research gaps in the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) literature. The first results from a lack of understanding of different patterns of CSR engagement with respect to CSR talk (impression management and the creation of symbolic images and documentation) and CSR walk (substantive implementation of CSR policies, structures and procedures). Related to this, the second gap concerns limited knowledge about the influence of firm size on CSR engagement. We develop a conceptual model that explains differences in CSR talk versus walk based on organizational cost and firm size. This allows us to theorize the antecedents of what we call the large firm implementation gap (large firms tend to focus on communicating CSR symbolically but do less to implement it into their core structures and procedures) and vice versa the small firm communication gap (less active communication and more emphasis on implementation). Our model expands a new theoretical understanding of CSR engagement based on as yet underemphasized firm‐level antecedents of CSR, and opens up several new avenues for future, and in particular comparative, research.

show abstract

Section: Firm Size and Organizational Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Firm Size and Organizational Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Walking and Talking Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications of Firm Size and Organizational Cost

Wickert

Scherer

Spence

2016

J Management Studies

276

253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the contrary, individuals who work for someone else are subject to rules and conditions set forth by their employer (Simon, 1951). There is likely to be significant heterogeneity in the decision to violate based on the size of the firm the employee works for (Josefy et al, 2015). Larger firms have more layers of bureaucracy (Sutton & Dobbin, 1996), including processes designed to control and standardize the decisions made by employees (Baker & Cullen, 1993;Sutton & Dobbin, 1996).…”

Section: Effects Of Firm Size and Asset Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two organizational factors that could moderate the decisions of individuals to violate are the size of the firm for whom they work (Josefy, Kuban, Ireland, & Hitt, 2015) and whether they own the assets used for production (Grossman & Hart, 1986;Williamson, 1985). The decisions of individuals who work for firms of more than one employee affect not only themselves, but their coworkers; thus, to limit the potential negative externalities of one employee's bad decisions (e.g., theft, shirking, unsafe driving), these firms reduce an employee's opportunity to violate by limiting their potential decisions (Baker & Cullen, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of firm size, asset ownership, and market prices on regulatory violations

Scott

Nyaga

2019

J of Ops Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An individual's temptation to violate regulations for personal gain increases with the economic payoff to do so. Firms, however, adopt strategies to reduce undesirable behavior from their employees. This article examines how individuals change their propensity to violate regulations as the price for their services varies. We posit that individuals will commit more intentional, but not unintentional, violations as the payoff to do so increases, and that this effect will be moderated by the size of the firm for whom he or she works and whether the firm or the individual owns the assets used for production. To test our hypotheses, we link data from millions of inspections of truck driver logbooks with spot market prices observed over the same 4‐year period. We find that drivers who operate independently intentionally violate restrictions on their work hours more frequently when prices increase—violating 34% more frequently when prices are at their highest versus lowest—but larger firms and the firm's ownership of the assets reduce a driver's responsiveness to price changes. At the extreme, drivers for large asset‐owning firms are completely unresponsive to prices. Asset‐owning drivers are responsive to market prices, even for the largest firms.

show abstract

“…They may be affected by environmental changes such as deregulations, privatization, technological, and sometimes disruptive sociopolitical change. They in addition may be facing increasing competition and interconnectedness of global economies, the growing importance of global markets, and evolving market demands (e.g., Josefy, Kuban, Ireland, & Hitt, 2015). Organizations, however, may not always be successful during environmental changes, for example because they give no thought to the need to initiate change (Hannan & Freeman, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using a portfolio‐based process to develop agility among employees

Vliet

Born

Molen

2019

Human Resource Dev Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fast‐paced and changeable nature of contemporary society results in organizations that increasingly need to train their employees to become more energetic, flexible, and adaptable: the so called “agile” employees. This study used personal development portfolios including frequent feedback interviews (with mentors and peers) over 2.5 years to assist 32 employees working in an organization undergoing change to become more agile. A portfolio implies setting agility goals, recording and assessing progress in one's agility. Data were collected on employees' agility, and were related to their portfolio. Results showed that the portfolio use significantly increased employees' agility and significantly enhanced the agreement between self‐rated and other‐rated agility. Findings favor the use of development portfolios by organizations in improving agility among their employees. Therefore, this study gives tools for the practice of Human Resources Development (HRD).

show abstract

All Things Great and Small: Organizational Size, Boundaries of the Firm, and a Changing Environment

Cited by 143 publications

References 280 publications

Walking and Talking Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications of Firm Size and Organizational Cost

Walking and Talking Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications of Firm Size and Organizational Cost

The effect of firm size, asset ownership, and market prices on regulatory violations

Using a portfolio‐based process to develop agility among employees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About