The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Evolution of Intracorporate Domains: Divisional Charter Losses in High-Technology, Multidivisional Corporations
Abstract
Modern corporations have become synonymous with the multidivisional form of organization. Variously interdependent divisions are “chartered” to look after one or more business areas, in effect defining the “turf” of the division and its purpose within the corporation, and collectively defining the corporate domain. However, once created, these divisional charters should not be regarded as rigid; they are susceptible to change. Particularly in fast-paced environments, such as in high-technology industries, divisional charters are liable to change as divisions add or subtract businesses to their charter responsibilities. These charter changes are seen as an adaptive device for large, multidivisional corporations in fast-paced environments. This paper presents a process model of how divisions change their domains in hypercompetitive contexts, focusing on the specific question of how divisions lose all or portions of their business charters. The paper is based on a larger inductive study of charter changes in ten divisions, both domestic and foreign, of a large, multinational, high-technology corporation. Data were collected over an 18-month period and included formal interviews, questionnaires, company documents, group interviews, media publications and direct observations of strategy formation sessions. Over 80 informants were interviewed across several managerial levels. Our data revealed three distinct patterns and logics of charter loss depending upon what phase of core business development a division found itself: (1) Divisions starting-up new core businesses lost these charters because of a combination of their failure in the new area and competition with other divisions in the company—the process revealed a competitive market for new charters; (2) Divisions rapidly growing new core businesses lost peripheral business areas in order to focus on the core business—the process emphasized a focus logic for charter change: finally (3) Divisions with mature charter areas were found to shed their core business areas because of an emerging misfit between their skills and culture and the nature of competition in the industry—the process emphasized the emerging nature of corporate mis-alignment and the abrupt charter changes that can follow. This paper contributes to organizational theory by exploring the evolution of large, diversified corporations, focusing on the organizational responses to fast-moving, competitive environments. It also contributes to strategy by revealing a “re-combinant” multidivisional organizational form, by which timely charter changes can be used by large corporations to keep pace in these turbulent contexts.
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
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
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
Explaining Development and Change in Organizations
van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1995.9508080329 · Cited by 3,762
Leonard-Barton, D. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.3.248 · Cited by 1,360
Cited by
Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2007.24160888 · Cited by 16,670
Self-citationRethinking Customer Solutions: From Product Bundles to Relational Processes
Tuli, K. R., Kohli, A. K., & Bharadwaj, S. G. (2007) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.71.3.001 · Cited by 1,375
Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.1255638 · Cited by 1,254
Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. (2010) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.006 · Cited by 1,245
Prolegomena on Coevolution: A Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms
Lewin, A. Y., & Volberda, H. W. (1999) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.10.5.519 · Cited by 1,049
Metadata
- Authors
- Galunic, D. C., & Eisenhardt, K. M.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 1996-06
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 255-282
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W1999729975
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 22.51
- 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: The Evolution of Intracorporate Domains: Divisional Charter Losses in High-Technology, Multidivisional Corporations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.7.3.255
- The paper
- Galunic, D. C., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1996). The Evolution of Intracorporate Domains: Divisional Charter Losses in High-Technology, Multidivisional Corporations. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.3.255
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.