R
Richard L. Daft
Researcher at Vanderbilt University
Publications - 47
Citations - 21910
Richard L. Daft is an academic researcher from Vanderbilt University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Information system & Organizational structure. The author has an hindex of 30, co-authored 47 publications receiving 20972 citations. Previous affiliations of Richard L. Daft include Queen's University & Texas A&M University.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design
Richard L. Daft,Robert H. Lengel +1 more
TL;DR: Models are proposed that show how organizations can be designed to meet the information needs of technology, interdepartmental relations, and the environment to both reduce uncertainty and resolve equivocality.
ReportDOI
Information Richness. A New Approach to Managerial Behavior and Organization Design
Richard L. Daft,Robert H. Lengel +1 more
TL;DR: The concept of information richness is introduced, and three models of information processing are proposed that describe (1) manager information behavior, (2) organizational mechanisms for coping with equivocality from the environment, and (3) organizational mechanism for internal coordination.
Journal ArticleDOI
Message equivocality, media selection and manager performance: implications for information systems
TL;DR: The findings indicate that media vary in their capacity to convey information cues and that high performing managers are more sensitive to the relationship between message ambiguity and media richness than low performing managers.
Journal ArticleDOI
A Dual-Core Model of Organizational Innovation
TL;DR: In this paper, the role of administrators and technical employees in the process leading to innovation adoption is examined, and a marked division of labor is found, indicating that two distinct i...
Journal ArticleDOI
Across the Great Divide: Knowledge Creation and Transfer Between Practitioners and Academics
TL;DR: The authors provide data on the role of academic-practitioner relationships in both generating and disseminating knowledge across boundaries, and make suggestions for increasing the value and relevance of future research to both academics and practitioners.