Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152642
|
| Title: | 例規動態：組織轉型中的慣性與彈性樣貌
Routine Dynamics: The Pattern of Inertia and Flexibility within Organization Transformation |
| Authors: | 關欣
Kuan, Hsin |
| Contributors: | 蕭瑞麟
Hsiao, Ruey-Lin
關欣
Kuan, Hsin |
| Keywords: | 組織轉型
組織例規
例規動態
組織作為
運作邏輯
Organization transformation
Organization routine
Routine dynamics
Organizing practice
Operating logics |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-08-05 13:04:13 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 企業為重拾競爭力而推動組織轉型，期望透過結構性的調整創造差異化。然而，在投入龐大資源後，組織變革卻僅成為局部流程優化，甚至被轉型所反噬。轉型的受阻肇因於組織例規中所存在的慣性，使企業難以引入根本性的改變，也忽略例規需釋放出彈性，需轉變更深層的運作邏輯，轉型才能奏效。忽略例規的慣性，企業即便引進尖端科技或大幅重整架構，也難以重塑組織能力和經營思維，使轉型則淪為空談。本研究將分析例規的慣性與彈性，探索對組織轉型所造成的影響。透過檢視一家美妝店與咖啡連鎖企業，本研究分析組織轉型時例規所產生的三層次變動：例規轉折、例規轉換與例規轉型，探索例規中慣性的形成與彈性的釋放。學理上，本文點出組織轉型的成效不應侷限於分析表層的例規變動，而需整合三個層次以剖析例規在變遷的幅度、作為的強度和思維的深度的樣貌，以理解例規產生慣性的過程及釋放出彈性的歷程。實務上，本研究點出，例規動態可闡釋組織轉型的狀態。這需檢視例規的改變是否落實於具體的改變，分析例規是否由運作性的做法發展成創意性的作為，以及企業運作邏輯是否發生根本性的轉變。如此便可知，轉型成敗的關鍵不在於觀察其漸進或激烈的變動幅度，也不能只以解凍過程看待，而需理解例規是否被慣性所牽制而讓轉型窒礙難行，更需明瞭例規能否釋放出改變的彈性，而使轉型水到渠成。
To regain competitiveness, firms strive to implement various organizational transformations and expect to create differentiation by means of structural adjustment. Nonetheless, in spite of investing enormous resources, efforts of organizational change merely achieve local optimization and often spark a backlash by firms’ own transformation. The failures in transformation are endured by firms’ inherent inertia, with an excessive focus on veneer changes, ignoring the essential shift in underlying logics which is crucial for enabling the necessary flexibility for change. As such, no matter whether firms introduce advanced technologies or expand restructuring, it remains difficult to reshape an organization’s capability, and transformation is thus reduced to lip service. This research elucidates the contrasts between ineffective and successful organizational transformations, focusing on the aspects of inertia and flexibility. This study examines three levels of routine change during transformation, which include routine transitioning, routine transferring and routine transforming, thereby exploring how the interplay between the inertia and flexibility of organizational rules could significantly influence the outcome of transformation. Theoretically, the layered dynamics indicates, transformation effect should not include only superficial alternation, but require a contrast of routines’ adjustment range, explore the distinctiveness of practice, and track the depth of cognitive shifts. Such analyses are conducive to the comprehension of how institutionalized routines may release their flexibilities so as to facilitate transformation. Practically, this research highlights that the lens of routine dynamics helps to elaborate how transformation occurs within an organization. It demands an analysis of whether routines change could be realized in deeper reconstruction, whether practices could be developed into creative organizing, and whether members’ intention would encourage fundamental change in operating logics. Thus, the key to transformation success lies not in incremental or radical changes, but in whether strategic shifts engender the requisite flexibility for genuine transformation. |
| Reference: | 一、中文文獻
黃昉鈺，2023，「形塑競爭優勢：聯嘉評估策略轉型決策」，國立政治大學商管個案中心：13-AC-01。
黃品傑，2020，「科技賦能：新加坡樟宜機場以資訊科技創造服務新能力」，國立政治大學科技管理與智慧財產研究所碩士論文。
蕭瑞麟、歐素華，2017，「資源流：聯合報系複合商業模式的形成」，《組織與管理》，第一期，第10卷，1-55頁。
二、英文文獻
Ahuja, G., & Katila, R. 2004. Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations. Strategic Management Journal, 25(8/9): 887-907.
Argyris, C. 1977. Double-loop learning in organizations. Harvard Business Review, 55: 115-125.
Argyris, C. 2006. Reinforcing organizational defensive routines: An unintended human resources activity. Human Resource Management, 25: 541-555.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. 1978. Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Artinger, F., Petersen, M., Gigerenzer, G., & Weibler, J. 2014. Heuristics as adaptive decision strategies in management. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36.
Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P., & Sonnenstuhl, W. J. 1996. The organizational transformation process: The micropolitics of dissonance reduction and the alignment of logics of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 477-506.
Baiyere, A., Salmela, H., & Tapanainen, T. 2020. Digital transformation and the new logics of business process management. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(3): 238-259.
Barr, P. S., Stimpert, J. L., & Huff, A. S. 1992. Cognitive change, strategic action, organizational renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5): 15.
Benedicte, R. 2005. The void at the heart of rules: Routines in the context of rule-following - The case of the Paris Metro Workshop. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5): 847-871.
Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., Yoo, Y., & King, J. L. 2016. Routines as shock absorbers during organizational transformation: Integration, control, and NASA’s enterprise information system. Organization Science, 27(3): 551-572.
Bigley, G. A., & Roberts, K. H. 2001. The incident command system: High reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6): 1281-1299.
Brannen, M. Y., Liker, J. K., & Fruin, W. M. 1998. Recontextualization and factory-to-factory knowledge transfer from Japan to the US: The Case of NSK. In J. K. Liker, W. M. Fruin, & P. S. Adler (Eds.), Remade in America: Transplanting and Transforming Japanese Management Systems: 117-153. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cennamo, C., Dagnino, G. B., Di Minin, A., & Lanzolla, G. 2020. Managing digital transformation: Scope of transformation and modalities of value co-generation and delivery. California Management Review, 62(4): 5-16.
Child, J., & Smith, C. 1987. The context and process of organizational transformation: Cabury Limited in its sector. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6): 565-593.
Cohen, M. D. 1991. Individual learning and organizational routine: Emerging connections. Organization Science, 2(1): 135-139.
Cohen, M. D., & Bacdayan, P. 1994. Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science, 5(4): 554-568.
Collinson, S., & Wilson, D. C. 2006. Inertia in Japanese organizations: Knowledge management routines and failure to innovate. Organization Studies, 27(9): 1359-3187.
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioural theory of the firm: Blackwell: Oxford.
D’Adderio, L. 2014. The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5): 1325-1350.
Dacin, M. T., Munir, K., & Tracey, P. 2010. Formal dining at Cambridge colleges: Linking ritual performance and institutional maintenance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6): 1393-1418.
Davis, J. P. 2016. The group dynamics of interorganizational relationships: Collaborating with multiple partners in innovation ecosystems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(4): 621-661.
Deken, F., Carlile, P. R., Berends, H., & Lauche, K. 2016. Generating novelty through interdependent routines: A process model of routine work. Organization Science, 27(3): 659-677.
Denis, J., Langley, A., & Cazale, L. 1996. Leadership and strategic change under ambiguity. Organization Studies, 17(4): 673-699.
Denrell, J., & Le Mens, G. 2020. Revisiting the competency trap. Industrial and Corporate Change, 29(1): 183-205.
Dionysiou, D. D., & Tsoukas, H. 2013. Understanidng the (re)creation of routines from within: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 38(2): 181-205.
Dittrich, K., Guérard, S., & Seidl, D. 2016. Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change. Organization Science, 27(3): 678-697.
Dittrich, K., & Seidl, D. 2018. Emerging intentionality in routine dynamics: A pragmatist view. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1): 111-138.
Dougherty, D. 1992. A practice-centered model of organizational renewal through product innovation. Strategic Management Journal., 13: 77, 16 pgs.
Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. 2010. Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3): 370-382.
Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34: 517-554.
Edmondson, A. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2): 350.
Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. 2001. Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 685-716.
Feldman, M. 2000. Organizational routines as a source of continuous change. Organization Science, 11(6): 611-629.
Feldman, M. 2003. A performative perspective on stability and change in organizational routines. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(4): 727-752.
Feldman, M., & Pentland, B. T. 2003. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48: 94-118.
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. 2022. Routine dynamics: Toward a critical conversation. Strategic Organization, 20(4): 846-859.
Felin, T., Foss, N. J., Heimeriks, K. H., & Madsen, T. L. 2012. Microfoundations of routines and capabilities: Individuals, processes, and structure. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8): 1351-1374.
Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., & Sambamurthy, V. 2006. Emergent by design: Performance and transformation at infosys technologies. Organization Science, 17(2): 277-286.
Gawer, A., & Phillips, N. 2013. Institutional work as logics shift: The case of Intel’s transformation to platform leader. Organization Studies, 34(8): 1035-1071.
Geiger, D., Danner-Schröder, A., & Kremser, W. 2021. Getting ahead of time—Performing temporal boundaries to coordinate routines under temporal uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(1): 220-264.
George, E., Chattopadhyay, P., Sitkin, S. B., & Barden, J. 2006. Cognitive underpinning of institutional persistence and change: A framing perspective. Academy of Management Review, 31(2): 347-365.
Gersick, C. J., & Hackman, J. R. 1990. Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 47: 65-97.
Gersick, C. J. G. 1994. Pacing strategic change: The case of A new venture. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1): 9-45.
Gilbert, C. 2005. Unbundling the structure of inertia: Resource versus routine rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5): 741-763.
Glaser, V. L. 2017. Design performances: How organizations inscribe artifacts to change routines. Academy of Management Journal, 60(6): 2126-2154.
Goh, K., & Pentland, B. 2019. From actions to paths to patterning: Toward a dynamic theory of patterning in routines. Academy of Management Journal, 62: 1901-1929.
Grodal, S., Nelson, A. J., & Siino, R. M. 2015. Help-seeking and help-giving as an organizational routine: Continual engagement in innovative work. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1): 136-168.
Gupta, A., Hoopes, D. G., & Knott, A. M. 2015. Redesigning routines for replication. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6): 851-871.
Hammer, M. 1990. Reengineering work: Don't automate, obliterate. Harvard Business Review, 68(4): 104-112.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change, American Sociological Review, Vol. 49: 149-164: American Sociological Association.
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. R. 1983. Structure inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 29(149-164).
Hargadon, A. B., & Douglas, Y. 2001. When innovations meet institutions: Edison and the design of the electric light. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3): 476-514.
Heimeriks, K. H., Schijven, M., & Gates, S. 2012. Manifestations of higher-order routines: The underlying mechanisms of deliberate learning in the context of postacquisition integration. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3): 703-726.
Heracleous, L., Papachroni, A., Andriopoulos, C., & Gotsi, M. 2017. Structural ambidexterity and competency traps: Insights from Xerox PARC. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 117: 327-338.
Hodgkinson, G. P. 1997. Cognitive inertia in a turbulent market: The case of UK residential estate agents. Journal of Management Studies, 34(6): 921-945.
Hoekzema, J. 2020. Bridging the gap between ecologies and clusters: Towards an integrative framework of routine interdependence. European Management Review, 17(2): 559–571.
Hommels, A. 2005. Studying obduracy in the city: Towards a productive fusion between technology studies and urban studies. Science, Technology & Human Values, 30(3): 323-351.
Howard-Grenville, J. A. 2005. The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16(6): 618-636.
Hsiao, R. L., & Ormerod, R. J. 1998. A new perspective of the dynamics of IT-enabled strategic change. Information Systems Journal, January(8): 21-52.
Hsiao, R. L., Tsai, D. H., & Lee, C. F. 2006. The problem of knowledge embeddedness: Knowledge transfer, coordination and reuse in information systems. Organization Studies, 27(9): 1289–1317.
Hutchins, E. 1991. Organizing work by adaptation. Organization Science, 2(1): 14-39.
Isabella, L. A. 1990. Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construct key organizational events. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1): 7-41.
Jammulamadaka, N. 2021. Enabling processes as routines that facilitate cognitive change. Management Decision, 59(3): 653-668.
Jarzabkowski, P. 2004. Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation, and practices-in-use. Organization Studies, 25(4): 529-560.
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. 2016. Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations, 60(1): 5-27.
Johnson, G., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. 2003. Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity-based view. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1): 3-22.
Kanter, R. 1983. The change masters: Innovation for productivity in American corporations. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kremser, W., & Blagoev, B. 2021. The dynamics of prioritizing: How actors temporally pattern complex role-routine ecologies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(2): 339-379.
Kremser, W., & Schreyögg, G. 2016. The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level. Organization Science, 27(3): 698-721.
Kretschmer, T., & Khashabi, P. 2020. Digital transformation and organization design: An integrated approach. California Management Review, 62(4): 86-104.
Lam, A. 1997. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: Problem of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18(6): 973-996.
Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4): 691-710.
LeBaron, C., Christianson, M. K., Garrett, L., & Ilan, R. 2016. Coordinating flexible performance during everyday work: An ethnomethodological study of handoff routines. Organization Science, 27(3): 514-534.
Lee, M., & Jay, J. 2015. Strategic responses to hybrid social ventures. California Management Review, 57(3): 126-148.
Leonardi, P. M. 2011. When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35(1): 147-168.
Lewin, A. Y., Massini, S., & Peeters, C. 2011. Microfoundations of internal and external absorptive capacity routines. Organization Science, 22(1): 81-98.
Lewin, K. 1951. Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers (Edited by Dorwin Cartwright.). Harpers.
Lóska, G., & Uotila, J. 2024. Digital transformation in corporate banking: Toward a blended service model. California Management Review, 66(3): 93-115.
Louis, M. R., & Sutton, R. I. 1991. Switching cognitive gears: From habits of mind to active thinking Human Relations, 44(1): 55-76.
Lounsbury, M. 2006. Strategy as practice: An activity-based approach. Organization Studies, 27(6): 906-909.
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. 1995. Simplicity as a strategy-making process: The effects of stage of organizational development and environment on performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5): 1386.
Lyytinen, K., & Robey, D. 1999. Learning failure in information systems development. Information Systems Journal, 9: 85-101.
Majchrzak, A., Markus, M. L., & Wareham, J. 2016. Designing for digital transformation: Lessons for information systems research from the study of ICT and societal challenges. MIS Quarterly, 40(2): 267-278.
Markus, M. L., Keil, Mark. 1994. If we build it, they will come: Designing information systems that people want to use. Sloan Management Review, 35(2): 11-25.
Mathias, B. D., Williams, D. W., & Smith, A. R. 2015. Entrepreneurial inception: The role of imprinting in entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1): 11-28.
Mazutis, D., & Eckardt, A. 2017. Sleepwalking into catastrophe: Cognitive bias and corporate climate change inertia. California Management Review, 59(3): 74-108.
McPherson, C. M., & Sauder, M. 2013. Logics in action: Managing institutional complexity in a drug court. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2): 165-196.
Miller, K. D., Choi, S., & Pentland, B. T. 2014. The role of transactive memory in the formation of organizational routines. Strategic Organization, 12(2): 109-133.
Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. 1985. Of strategy, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal, 6: 257-272.
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
Nigam, A., Huising, R., & Golden, B. 2016. Explaining the selection of routines for change during organizational search. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(4): 551-583.
Ocasio, W., Loewenstein, J., & Nigam, A. 2015. How streams of communication produce and change instotutional logics: The role of categories. Academy of Management Review, 40(1): 28-48.
Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1): 145-179.
Omidvar, O., Safavi, M., & Glaser, V. L. 2023. Algorithmic routines and dynamic inertia: How organizations avoid adapting to changes in the environment. Journal of Management Studies, 60(2): 313-345.
Orlikowski, W. J. 1996. Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1): 63–93.
Orlikowski, W. J. 2002. Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3): 249-273.
Pawar, B. S., & Eastman, K. K. 1997. The nature and implications of contextual influences on transformational leadership: A conceptual examination. Academy of Management Review, 22(1): 80-109.
Pawlowski, S. D., & Robey, D. 2004. Bridging user organizations: Knowledge brokering and the work of information technology professionals. MIS Quarterly, 28(4): 645-672.
Pentland, B. 1992. Organizing moves in software support lines. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37: 527-548.
Pentland, B. T., & Feldman, M. S. 2005. Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14(5): 793-815.
Pentland, B. T., & Feldman, M. S. 2008. Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Information & Organization, 18(4): 235-250.
Pentland, B. T., Hærem, T., & Hillison, D. 2011. The (n)ever-changing world: Stability and change in organizational routines. Organization Science, 22(6): 1369-1383.
Pentland, B. T., & Rueter, H. H. 1994. Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3): 484-510.
Perkmann, M., & Spicer, A. 2014. How emerging organizations take form: The role of imprinting and values in organizational bricolage. Organization Science, 25(6): 1785-1806.
Pettigrew, A. M. 1987. Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6): 649-670.
Polidoro, F. 2020. Knowledge, routines, and cognitive effects in nonmarket selection environments: An examination of the regulatory review of innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 41(13): 2400-2435.
Ramus, T., Vaccaro, A., & Brusoni, S. 2017. Institutional complexity in tubulent times: Formalisation, collaboration and the emergence of blended logics. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4): 1253-1284.
Reay, T., Golden-Biddle, K., & Germann, K. 2006. Legitimizing a new role: Small wins and microprocesses of change. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5): 977-998.
Rerup, C., & Feldman, M. S. 2011. Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3): 577-610.
Sailer, P., Loscher, G.J. and Kaiser, S. 2024. Coordinated interdependence: How patterning governs flexibility in a routine cluster. Journal of Management Studies, 61: 1884-1915.
Sandberg, J., Holmström, J., & Lyytinen, K. 2020. Digitization and phase transitions in platform organizing logics: Evidence from the process automation industry. MIS Quarterly, 44(1): 129-153.
Schulz, M. 2008. Staying on track: A voyage to the internal mechanisms of routine reproduction. In M. C. Becker (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Routines: 228-255. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Scott-Morton, M. (Ed.). 1991. The corporation of the 1990s: Information technology and organizational transformation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sele, K., & Grand, S. 2016. Unpacking the dynamics of ecologies of routines: Mediators and their generative effects in routine interactions. Organization Science, 27(3): 722-738.
Senge, P. M. 1990. The leader's new work: Building learning Organizations. Sloan Management Review, 32(1): 7-23.
Sia, S. K., Weill, P., & Zhang, N. 2021. Designing a future-ready enterprise: The digital transformation of DBS Bank. California Management Review, 63(3): 35-57.
Simon, H. A. 1990. Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 125-134.
Solberg, E., Traavik, L. E. M., & Wong, S. I. 2020. Digital mindsets: Recognizing and leveraging individual beliefs for digital transformation. California Management Review, 62(4): 105-124.
Spencer, B., Salvato, C., & Rerup, C. 2023. Routine regulation as a source for managing conflict within alliances: An integrative framework. Industrial & Corporate Change, 32(6): 1333-1351.
Swanson, E. B. 2019. Technology as routine capability. MIS Quarterly, 43(3): 1007-1024.
Swanson, E. B., & Ramiller, N. C. 1997. The organizing vision in information systems innovation. Organization Science, 8(5): 458-474.
Tett, G. 2015. The silo effect: The peril of expertise and the promise of breaking down barriers. London: Simon & Schuster.
Theeke, M., Polidoro, F., & Fredrickson, J. W. 2018. Path-dependent routines in the evaluation of novelty: The effects of innovators’ new knowledge use on brokerage firms’ coverage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(4): 910-942.
Tinson, J., & Nuttall, P. 2023. Rituals and routines: reflecting change, redefining meaning, recasting scope. Journal of Marketing Management, 39(13/14): 1163-1165.
Turner, S. F., & Rindova, V. P. 2012. A balancing act: How organizations pursue consistency in routine functioning in the face of ongoing change. Organization Science, 23(1): 24-46.
Turner, S. F., & Rindova, V. P. 2018. Watching the clock: Action timing, patterning, and routine performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4): 1253-1280.
Tyre, M., & von Hippel, E. 1997. The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations. Organization Science, 8(1): 71–83.
Venkatraman, N. 1994. IT-enabled business transformation: From automation to business scope redefinition. Sloan Management Review, 35(2): 73-87.
Volkoff, O., Strong, D. M., & Elmes, M. B. 2007. Technological embeddedness and organizational change. Organization Science, 18(5): 832-849.
Walsham, G., & Barrett, M. 1999. Electronic trading and work transformation in the London Insurance Market. Information Systems Research, 10(1): 1-22.
Whittington, R. 2007. Strategy practice and strategy process: Family differences and the sociological eye. Organization Studies, 28(10): 1575-1586.
Yi, S., Knudsen, T., & Becker, M. C. 2016. Inertia in routines: A hidden source of organizational variation. Organization Science, 27(3): 782-800.
Zuzul, T., & Tripsas, M. 2019. Start-up inertia versus flexibility: The role of founder identity in a nascent industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 65(2): 395-433. |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
109364504 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109364504 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 450401.pdf | | 37705Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
