Design Variations Within Organizations.

de, Andrew H. Van; Delbecq, André L.

doi:10.5465/ambpp.1973.4981546

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Interdependence and Structural Integration1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1985

2019

Publication Types

Select...

Article3

Other2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent5

Authors

Journals

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Corresponding to increasing levels of interdependence are coordination mechanisms with increasing levels of coordination capacity, such as planning, authority and mutual adjustment (Tushman & Nadler, 1978). Empirical analysis has generally supported the positive association between the extent of interdependence and the coordination capacity of the coordination mechanisms used (Gulati & Singh, 1998;Lawrence & Lorsch, 1967;Van de Ven & Delbecq, 1973, 1974.…”

Section: Interdependence and Structural Integrationmentioning

confidence: 98%

Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration is (Un)Necessary

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Interdependence and Structural Integrationmentioning

confidence: 98%

Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration is (Un)Necessary

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

References

2019

Evolutionary Selection Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration Is (Un)necessary

Puranam

Singh

Chaudhuri

2009

Organization Science

314

270

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acquirers who buy small technology-based firms for their technological capabilities often discover that postmerger integration can destroy the very innovative capabilities that made the acquired organization attractive in the first place. Viewing structural integration as a mechanism to achieve coordination between acquirer and target organizations helps explain why structural integration may be necessary in technology acquisitions despite the costs of disruption this imposes, as well as the conditions under which it becomes less (or un-) necessary. We show that interdependence motivates structural integration but that preexisting common ground offers acquirers an alternate path to achieving coordination, which may be less disruptive than structural integration.

show abstract

Design Variations Within Organizations.

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration is (Un)Necessary

Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration is (Un)Necessary

References

Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration Is (Un)necessary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About