We advance arguments for why and how a coevolutionary perspective and framework of analysis can provide a new lens and new directions for research in strategic management and organization studies. We identify the distinguishing properties of coevolution in an attempt to define coevolutionary research from other evolutionary research in social sciences. We also outline and discuss the empirical challenges and requirements for undertaking research within coevolutionary inquiry systems. In particular we stress the relevance of specifying coevolutionary models for reframing the selection adaptation standoff when applied to research on organization change over time, in general, and specifically to the mutation and emergence of new organizational forms. Furthermore, a coevolutionary framework has the potential to bridge and reintegrate strategy and organization theory teaching and research within a holistic framework. In our view such a reintegration is the sine qua non for studying organizational change over t...

Prolegomena on Coevolution: a Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms

หนงสอ Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction เขยนโดย Colin F. Camerer มวตถประสงคเพอนำเสนอหลกฐานเชงประจกษจากผลการวจยจำนวนมากมายทยนยนอทธพลของปจจยทางจตวทยาทมผลตอการตดสนใจตามทฤษฎเกม หนงสอ เลมนไดนำเสนอแนวคดทฤษฎทเพมความสามารถในการอธบายพฤตกรรมการตดสนใจตามทฤษฎเกม (Game theory) ซง von Neumann; & Morgenstern ไดเสนอไวในป ค.ศ. 1944 โดยชใหเหนวา ปจจยทางจตวทยามอทธพลทำใหการตดสนใจทเกดขนจรงคลาดเคลอนจากการคาดการณของทฤษฎเกม

Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction

Since the meta-analysis by De Dreu and Weingart (2003b) on the effects of intragroup conflict on group outcomes, more than 80 new empirical studies of conflict have been conducted, often investigating more complex, moderated relationships between conflict and group outcomes, as well as new types of intragroup conflict, such as process conflict. To explore the trends in this new body of literature, we conducted a meta-analysis of 116 empirical studies of intragroup conflict (n = 8,880 groups) and its relationship with group outcomes. To address the heterogeneity across the studies included in the meta-analysis, we also investigated a number of moderating variables. Stable negative relationships were found between relationship and process conflict and group outcomes. In contrast to the results of De Dreu and Weingart, we did not find a strong and negative association between task conflict and group performance. Analyses of main effects as well as moderator analyses revealed a more complex picture. Task conflict and group performance were more positively related among studies where the association between task and relationship conflict was relatively weak, in studies conducted among top management teams rather than non-top management teams, and in studies where performance was measured in terms of financial performance or decision quality rather than overall performance.

The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis.

This paper outlines an alternative theory of organization-environment coevolution that generalizes a model of organization adaptation first proposed by March (1991), linking firm-level exploration and exploitation adaptations to changes in the population of organizations. The theory considers organizations, their populations, and their environments as the interdependent outcome of managerial actions, institutional influences, and extra-institutional changes (technological, sociopolitical, and other environmental phenomena). In particular, the theory incorporates potential differences and equifinal outcomes related to country-specific variation. The basic theses of this paper are that firm strategic and organization adaptations coevolve with changes in the environment (competitive dynamics, technological, and institutional) and organization population and forms, and that new organizational forms can mutate and emerge from the existing population of organizations. The theory has guided a multicountry research collaboration on strategic and organization adaptations and the mutation and emergence of new organizational forms from within the existing population of organizations.

The Coevolution of New Organizational Forms

This paper develops an organizational approach to corporate governance and assesses the effectiveness of corporate governance and implications for policy. Most corporate governance research focuses on a universal link between corporate governance practices (e.g. shareholder activism, board independence) and performance outcomes, but neglects how interdependences between the organization and diverse environments lead to variations in the effectiveness of different corporate governance practices. In contrast to such 'closed systems' approaches, we propose a framework based on 'open systems' approaches to organizations which examines these organizational interdependencies in terms of the costs, contingencies and complementarities of different corporate governance practices. These three sets of organizational factors are useful in analyzing the effectiveness of corporate governance in diverse organizational environments. We also explore how costs, contingencies and complementarities impact approaches to policy such as 'soft-law' or 'hard law', and their effectiveness in different contexts.

/pdf/an-organizational-approach-to-comparative-corporate-w0wsg0nmd5.pdf

An Organizational Approach to Comparative Corporate Governance: Costs, Contingencies, and Complementarities

The purpose of this study is to determine the degree to which the organization and processes (particularly debate and trust) of top management teams (TMTs) influence the speed and comprehensiveness of strategic decision making in startups.Two hypotheses suggest that a departmental model of TMT organization will result in speedy, comprehensive decision making.Two other hypotheses predict that debate, although likely to generate comprehensive decisions, will slow down the process.According to two additional hypotheses, a CEO model of TMT organization will result in quick but sketchy decisions.High levels of trust between TMT members, however, are expected to reduce the negative impact that a CEO model has on the comprehensiveness of decisions. Data from a survey of 56 high-technology startups in Germany are used to evaluate these hypotheses.Although the data support most of the hypotheses, they offer no evidence that establishing either a CEO model or trust among TMT members will decrease the comprehensiveness or accelerate the speed of decision making.Moreover, debate is not shown to decrease the speed of the decision making process, although it certainly generates comprehensive decisions.As a whole, the findings suggest that a departmental model of TMT organization is conducive to a quick, thorough decision making process. (SAA)

Strategic Decision Making in Start-Ups: The Effect of Top Management Team Organization and Processes on Speed and Comprehensiveness

In 2002, the German Corporate Governance Code was adopted. This paper examines the overall acceptance of the Code recommendations and identifies its critical standards that receive comparably less agreement among German listed companies. The study is based on the compliance declarations of 408 firms listed at the Frankfurt Stock Exchange. The findings indicate a significantly high level of Code conformity which can be expected to increase in the future. Comparative analyses reveal that company size is positively associated with the extent of Code compliance. Neuralgic norms concern the personal liability and compensation of the board members, the staffing of the boards, the structure of the supervisory board and accounting requirements.

Compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code: An Empirical Analysis of the Compliance Statements by German Listed Companies

Compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code: an empirical analysis of the compliance statements by German listed companies

Strategic decision making in start-ups: the effect of top management team organization and processes on speed and comprehensiveness

This article is concerned with the assessment of the substantiation of management decisions in practice. The necessity for this undertaking derives from the fact that to be successful, management must choose the right extent of analysis for preparing major decisions. Testing this hypothesis requires the ability to measure the thoroughness of a decision preparation and to relate different levels of thoroughness to the success of the decision outcomes. In this paper, the author first presents the conceptual framework of argumentation rationality which makes it possible to measure the thoroughness of a decision preparation-or in other words, the soundness of reasons given for the decision. For a concretetrial usage, the concept is then combined with the methodology of account analysis introduced by Lewin (Lewin 1996, Lewin and Hunter 1996, Hunter 1999) for the research project on "New Organization Forms in the Information Age" (NOFIA). The arguments given explicitly in the accounts express rationales for management decisions and thus give hints on the intensity of the decision preparation. Using a simplified version of the measuring concept which assesses the argumentation rationality on three selected rationality determinants (pro/contra relation, depth of arguments, and breadth of arguments), two different types of rationality analyses are carried out to illustrate the fruitfulness of the approach. First, on the basis of 16 accounts concerning an important strategic decision of Daimler-Benz made in 1985 (becoming an integrated technology group), the arguments discussed during that time are identified and structured for assessing the substantiation of decision preparation. The developed structure of reasoning not only allows a formal evaluation, but in addition offers starting points for a substantial discussion of the change action. Secondly, 138 accounts from the German automotive industry of the years 1990-1997 are analyzed in order to identify first typical patterns of management argumentation. Based on the available empirical foundation, four types of reasoning are isolated, which differ characteristically with respect to the considered rationality determinants. The paper closes with a perspective on significant questions for further elaborating as well as employing the concept in future research.

Axel v. Werder

Papers

Strategic Decision Making in Start-Ups: The Effect of Top Management Team Organization and Processes on Speed and Comprehensiveness

Compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code: An Empirical Analysis of the Compliance Statements by German Listed Companies

Compliance with the German Corporate Governance Code: an empirical analysis of the compliance statements by German listed companies

Strategic decision making in start-ups: the effect of top management team organization and processes on speed and comprehensiveness

Argumentation Rationality of Management Decisions