The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice
Abstract
A central proposition in organization theory is that discrete organizational forms are matched to environmental conditions, market strategies, or exchange conditions. This paper develops a contrary theoretical proposition. We argue that efficiency may dictate modulating between discrete governance modes (i.e., structural modulation) in response to a stable set of exchange conditions. If governance choices are discrete, as much of organization theory argues, then the consequent steady-state functionality delivered by these organizational forms is itself discrete. However, if the desired functionality lies in-between the steady-state functionality delivered by two discrete choices, then efficiency gains may be available by modulating between modes. We develop an analytical model of structural modulation and examine factors that influence when modulation is ef- ficiency enhancing, as well as the optimal rate of modulation. We conclude that under certain conditions structural modulation is efficiency enhancing. Further, contrary to theories that highlight the potentially destructive consequences of inertia on organizational survival, we identify important efficiencyyielding benefits of inertia.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Comparative Economic Organization: The Analysis of Discrete Structural Alternatives
Williamson, O. E. (1991) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393356 · Cited by 7,151
Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305755 · Cited by 4,527
Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. W. (1951) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872675100400101 · Cited by 3,379
Price, Authority, and Trust: From Ideal Types to Plural Forms
Bradach, J. L., & Eccles, R. G. (1989) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.15.080189.000525 · Cited by 1,990
Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization
Brass, D. J. (1984) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392937 · Cited by 1,549
Explaining the Swollen Middle: Why Most Transactions Are a Mix of “Market” and “Hierarchy”
Hennart, J.-F. (1993) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.4.4.529 · Cited by 652 · cited 1×
“In regard to boundary choices , Bradach and Eccles ( 1989 ) and Hennart ( 1993 ) argue that between markets and hierarchies is a continuum of hybrid governance choices .”
Cited by
Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206308316058 · Cited by 2,702
Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present, and Future
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0025 · Cited by 2,580
Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008) · Research in Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002 · Cited by 2,431
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0428 · Cited by 2,224
Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Alliance Formation
Lavie, D., & Rosenkopf, L. (2006) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2006.22083085 · Cited by 1,371
Metadata
- Authors
- Nickerson, J. A., & Zenger, T. R.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2002-10
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 547-566
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2247765150
- Cited by
- 374
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 20.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.13.5.547.7815
- The paper
- Nickerson, J. A., & Zenger, T. R. (2002). Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.5.547.7815
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
