CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 129Management and Organizational StudiesManagement Theory and PracticeInformation Systems Theories and Implementation

Performing modularity: Competing rules, performative struggles and the effect of organizational theories on the organization

Open access
D’Adderio, Luciana, Pollock, Neil·2014·Organization Studies
DOI 10.1177/0170840614538962
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We address the effect of organizational theories on the organization by focusing on how modularity, a widespread and influential organizational theory, performs a modular organization. While scholars have offered opposing arguments for the influence of this theory—i.e. that it either succeeds or fails to “produce” modular organizations—we show just how and how far modularity is enacted and shapes the organization, and how it may be shaped in turn. Drawing on recent advances in performativity theory we thus contribute to modularity by showing how the modular organization emerges over time as the outcome of performative struggles among competing and complementary theories and how these struggles contribute to modifying the theory and “designing” organizations. We also add to performativity by theorizing the competition between multiple theories, the emergence of unexpected consequences or “errors”, and their implications for organizational practices and boundaries.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0170840614538962

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The rise of platforms is due second to technology: the Internet reduces search and other transaction costs facilitating coordination of distributed economic activity.

    “A second reason is technology: the Internet reduces search and other transaction costs facilitating such harnessing and the effective coordination of distributed economic activity (D'Adderio & Pollock, 2014).”

    From Evaluative infrastructures: Accounting for platform organization (2017) · cites this paper as D'Adderio & Pollock, 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 101 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
D’Adderio, L., & Pollock, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Organization Studies
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2014-08-19
Volume
35
Issue
12
Pages
1813-1843
ISSN
  • 0170-8406 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3044
DOI
10.1177/0170840614538962
OpenAlex
W2082893897
Cited by
129
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
36.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Organization Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (acceptedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/E01948X/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management Theory and Practice
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Keywords
organizational modularity, performativity, performative theory, organizational design, organizational boundaries, unintended consequences, organizational practices

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review