Resource dependence theory

About: Resource dependence theory is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2732 publications have been published within this topic receiving 184871 citations.

Organizational theory for dissemination and implementation research

Abstract: Even under optimal internal organizational conditions, implementation can be undermined by changes in organizations’ external environments, such as fluctuations in funding, adjustments in contracting practices, new technology, new legislation, changes in clinical practice guidelines and recommendations, or other environmental shifts. Internal organizational conditions are increasingly reflected in implementation frameworks, but nuanced explanations of how organizations’ external environments influence implementation success are lacking in implementation research. Organizational theories offer implementation researchers a host of existing, highly relevant, and heretofore largely untapped explanations of the complex interaction between organizations and their environment. In this paper, we demonstrate the utility of organizational theories for implementation research. We applied four well-known organizational theories (institutional theory, transaction cost economics, contingency theories, and resource dependency theory) to published descriptions of efforts to implement SafeCare, an evidence-based practice for preventing child abuse and neglect. Transaction cost economics theory explained how frequent, uncertain processes for contracting for SafeCare may have generated inefficiencies and thus compromised implementation among private child welfare organizations. Institutional theory explained how child welfare systems may have been motivated to implement SafeCare because doing so aligned with expectations of key stakeholders within child welfare systems’ professional communities. Contingency theories explained how efforts such as interagency collaborative teams promoted SafeCare implementation by facilitating adaptation to child welfare agencies’ internal and external contexts. Resource dependency theory (RDT) explained how interagency relationships, supported by contracts, memoranda of understanding, and negotiations, facilitated SafeCare implementation by balancing autonomy and dependence on funding agencies and SafeCare developers. In addition to the retrospective application of organizational theories demonstrated above, we advocate for the proactive use of organizational theories to design implementation research. For example, implementation strategies should be selected to minimize transaction costs, promote and maintain congruence between organizations’ dynamic internal and external contexts over time, and simultaneously attend to organizations’ financial needs while preserving their autonomy. We describe implications of applying organizational theory in implementation research for implementation strategies, the evaluation of implementation efforts, measurement, research design, theory, and practice. We also offer guidance to implementation researchers for applying organizational theory.

Enterprise Risk Management and the Financial Reporting Process: The Experiences of Audit Committee Members, CFOs, and External Auditors

Abstract: The recent financial crisis has brought to the forefront the need for companies to effectively manage their risks. In this regard, one approach that has gained prominence is enterprise risk management (ERM). Importantly, little is known about the link between ERM and the financial reporting process. This link is critical, because it is imperative that financial reporting adequately depicts the financial status (e.g., valuations, estimates) and associated risks of a company as revealed by ERM. Additionally, from an auditing perspective, ERM affects the risks of misstatement, which should impact audit planning. Accordingly, the objective of this study is to examine the experiences of audit partners, CFOs, and audit committee (AC) members (“the governance triad”) on the link between ERM and the financial reporting process. To determine whether members of the governance triad focus on monitoring, strategy, or both, we also examine their definition of and experiences with ERM with respect to agency and/or resource dependence theory. To address these issues, we conduct semistructured interviews of experienced individuals that form the governance triads from 11 public companies. There are three major findings from our study. First, importantly, all three types of participants see a strong link between ERM and the financial reporting process. Second, despite recognition of the broad nature of ERM, the predominant experiences of the actual roles played by triad members center on agency theory, while resource dependence may be relatively underemphasized by all triad members. Finally, CFOs and AC members indicate that auditors may be especially underutilizing ERM in the audit process, suggesting an “expectations gap.” This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Using resource dependency theory to measure the environment in health care organizational studies: a systematic review of the literature.

Abstract: Background Studies using the resource dependency theory (RDT) perspective commonly focus on one or more of the following environmental dimensions: munificence, dynamism, and complexity. To date, no one has reviewed the use of this theory in the health care management literature and there exists no consensus on how to operationalize the market environment in health care settings. Purpose The purpose of this review is to examine and summarize the ways in which RDT has been applied in empirical studies of the external environments of health care organizations. In so doing, we identify gaps in the literature and examine the extent to which previous empirical findings aligned with hypothesized relationships based on RDT. Methodology We conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature using a bibliographic search of PubMed and ABI/Inform databases. To identify all health care studies that incorporated the RDT perspective, the words "healthcare" or "health care" were searched in combination with any of the following words: resource dependency theory, uncertainty perspective, environment, munificence, dynamism, and complexity. We also performed a hand search of the reference lists of all manuscripts identified in the initial search to identify additional articles. Findings Twenty studies were included in this review. Wide variability existed in the number of variables used to measure the environment, the environmental constructs measured, and the specific variables used to operationalizethe environmental constructs. Of the 198 tests examining the relationship between environmental variables and the outcome of interest, 26.8% resulted in findings that supported the RDT-predicted hypotheses. Practice implications The RDT literature is limited to studies of hospitals, nursing homes, and medical practices. There is little consensus on how to measure or operationalize the environment in these studies. No previous studies have measured the environment for other health care settings such as ambulatory surgery centers, public health departments, or assisted living facilities.

Learning networks, power and legitimacy in multinational subsidiaries

Abstract: This paper demonstrates how learning networks are used by subsidiaries to maximize the strategic value of knowledge as a source of power; and how the embedded nature of knowledge influences this process. Using resource dependence and legitimacy concepts, it is argued that different forms of learning networks afford knowledge the legitimacy to act as a source of power. These forms are based on combinations of intra- or inter-organizational local and international relations. The results indicate that local learning networks are more likely to enable innovations because local contexts are perceived as being the most useful or legitimate. Moreover, international intra-organizational learning networks reinforce the legitimacy of knowledge as an important resource by encouraging diffusion. The tension between organizational strategies and institutional structures supporting innovation is explored.