Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 565

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Coordination Theory Approach to Organizational Process Design

Crowston, Kevin·1997·Organization Science

Abstract

An important practical problem for many managers is finding alternative processes for performing a desired task, for example, one that is more efficient, cheaper, or that is automated or enhanced by the use of information technology. Improving processes also poses theoretical challenges. Coordination theory provides an approach to the study of processes. In this view, the design of a process depends on the coordination mechanisms chosen to manage dependencies among tasks and resources involved in the process. In this paper, I use coordination theory to analyze the software change process of a large mini-computer manufacturer. Mechanisms analyzed include those for task assignment, resource sharing, and managing dependencies between modules of source code. For each, I suggest alternative mechanisms and thus alternative designs for the process. The organization assigned problem reports to engineers based on the module that appeared to be in error, since engineers only worked on particular modules. Alternative task assignment mechanisms include assignment to engineers based on workload or market-like bids. Modules of source code were not shared, but rather “owned” by one engineer, thus reducing the need for coordination. An alternative resource sharing mechanism would be needed to manage source code if multiple engineers could work on the same modules. Finally, engineers managed dependencies between modules informally, relying on their personal knowledge of which other engineers used their code; alternatives include formally defining the interfaces between modules and tracking their users. Software bug fixing provides a microcosm of coordination problems and solutions. Similar coordination problems arise in most processes and are managed by a similar range of mechanisms. For example, diagnosing bug reports and assigning them to engineers may have interesting parallels to diagnosing patients and assigning them to specialists. While the case presented does not formally test coordination theory, it does illustrate the potential of coordination theory for exploring the space of organizational processes. Future work includes developing more rigorous techniques for such analyses, applying the techniques to a broader range of processes, identifying additional coordination problems and mechanisms and developing tools for collecting and comparing processes and automatically suggesting potential alternatives.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.8.2.157

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 565

Metadata

Authors
Crowston, K.
Venue
Organization Science
Published
1997-04
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
157-175
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2138375961
Cited by
565
References
1
FWCI
26.54
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: A Coordination Theory Approach to Organizational Process Design. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.8.2.157
The paper
Crowston, K. (1997). A Coordination Theory Approach to Organizational Process Design. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.8.2.157

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.