This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Whittington, R. Articles by Conyon, M. Search for Related Content

Change and Complementarities in the New Competitive Landscape: A European Panel Study, 1992–1996

Said Business School, University of Oxford, New College, Oxford OX1 3BN, United Kingdom
Centre for Creativity, Strategy and Change, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom
City University Business School, Frobisher Crescent, Barbican Centre, London EC2Y 8HB, United Kingdom
Centre for Creativity, Strategy and Change, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom
Corporate Performance Research Unit, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick,Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom

This paper addresses three weaknesses in the literature on new organizational forms: the limited mapping of the extent of contemporary organizational change; confusion about how contemporary changes link together; and the lack of systematic testing of the performance consequences of this kind of change. Drawing on a large-scale survey of organizational innovation in European firms, the paper finds widespread but not revolutionary change in terms of organization structure, processes, and boundaries. Using the economics notion of complementarities, the paper develops contingency and configurational approaches to suggest that organizational innovations will tend to cluster in particular ways and that the performance benefits of these innovations depend on their clustering. Complementarities in performance are explored from both inductive and deductive perspectives. Consistent with the expectations of complementarity theory, high-performing firms appeared to be innovating more and differently than low-performing firms. Again consistent with complementarities, piecemeal changes—with the exception of IT—were found to deliver little performance benefit, while exploitation of the full set of innovations was associated with high performance. Though few European firms were found to exploit the complementarities of new organizational practices, those that did enjoyed high-performance premia.

Key Words: Complementarities; Organization Structure; Organizational Configurations; New Organizational Forms

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. Ennen and A. Richter The Whole Is More Than the Sum of Its Parts-- Or Is It? A Review of the Empirical Literature on Complementarities in Organizations Journal of Management, January 1, 2010; 36(1): 207 - 233. [Abstract] [PDF]

				F. Graetz and A. C.T. Smith Changing forms of organizing in Australian public companies Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, December 1, 2009; 47(3): 338 - 357. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. G. Colombo, M. Delmastro, and L. Rabbiosi "High performance" work practices, decentralization, and profitability: evidence from panel data Ind. Corp. Change, December 1, 2007; 16(6): 1037 - 1067. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Olma Physical Bergsonism and the Worldliness of Time Theory Culture Society, November 1, 2007; 24(6): 123 - 137. [PDF]

				S. Brusoni and A. Prencipe Making Design Rules: A Multidomain Perspective Organization Science, March 1, 2006; 17(2): 179 - 189. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Alasoini In Search of Generative Results: A New Generation of Programmes to Develop Work Organization Economic and Industrial Democracy, February 1, 2006; 27(1): 9 - 37. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Andrews, G. A. Boyne, K. J. Meier, L. J. O'Toole Jr., and R. M. Walker Representative Bureaucracy, Organizational Strategy, and Public Service Performance: An Empirical Analysis of English Local Government J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., October 1, 2005; 15(4): 489 - 504. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. C. Reeves, E. W. Ford, W. J. Duncan, and P. M. Ginter Communication clarity in strategic management data sources Strategic Organization, August 1, 2005; 3(3): 243 - 278. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. K. Sinha and A. H. Van de Ven Designing Work Within and Between Organizations Organization Science, July 1, 2005; 16(4): 389 - 408. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Siggelkow and J. W. Rivkin Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity Organization Science, March 1, 2005; 16(2): 101 - 122. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Siggelkow and D. A. Levinthal Escaping real (non-benign) competency traps: linking the dynamics of organizational structure to the dynamics of search Strategic Organization, February 1, 2005; 3(1): 85 - 115. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Siggelkow and D. A. Levinthal Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation Organization Science, November 1, 2003; 14(6): 650 - 669. [Abstract] [PDF]