The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments
Open accessAbstract
Hypercompetition has received much attention, but an important question has not been answered: What organizational forms lead to success in hypercompetitive environments? Hypercompetition forces firms to move more quickly and boldly and to experiment in ways that do not conform to traditional administrative theory. Bureaucratic vertical forms severely hamper the ability to respond to accelerating competition. Flexible forms, in contrast, can respond to a wide variety of changes in the competitive environment in an appropriate and timely way. The author examines several alternative flexible forms for coping with hypercompetitive environments. Flexibility derives from the repertoire of managerial capabilities (management challenge) and the responsiveness of the organization (organization design challenge). On the basis of theories of control, the author argues that organizational flexibility is inherently paradoxical and requires a constructive friction between change and preservation. The paradox of flexibility is portrayed in a conceptual model that relates competitive environments, certain types of flexibility, and organizational conditions. The author develops a rich typology of organizational forms for coping with hypercompetition, each of which reflects a particular way of addressing change and preservation. Furthermore, he explores different trajectories of organizational development over time, especially those relating to revitalization. The implications of the typology for strategy and organization design research in hypercompetitive environments are profound.
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
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375 · Cited by 5,649
Using Paradox to Build Management and Organization Theories
Poole, M. S., & van de Ven, A. H. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4308389 · Cited by 1,905
Cited by
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375 · Cited by 5,649
Wade, M., & Hulland, J. (2004) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148626 · Cited by 2,822
Strategy Research in Emerging Economies: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom*
Wright, M., Filatotchev, I., Hoskisson, R. E., & Peng, M. W. (2005) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2005.00487.x · Cited by 1,843
Lu, Y., & Ramamurthy, K. (. (2011) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41409967 · Cited by 1,309
ORGANIZATIONAL RESTRUCTURING AND MIDDLE MANAGER SENSEMAKING.
Balogun, J., & Johnson, G. (2004) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/20159600 · Cited by 1,255
Metadata
- Authors
- Volberda, H. W.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 1996-08
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 359-374
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W1989765500
- Cited by
- 1,168
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 47.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.7.4.359
- The paper
- Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.4.359
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.