Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Construction of digital 3D magic-cube organization structure for innovation-driven manufacturing

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Engineering Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Owing to the heterogeneity between functional units and resource scarcity, manufacturing firms have been struggling with intra-organizational coordination for productivity and innovation. Traditional organizational structures, such as linear-functional and matrix, may cause responsibility division and independent goals (Shahani, 2020), and are more difficult to be adopted by large-sized innovative manufacturing firms for quantity production. This is based on a review of several new forms of organization (i.e., network organization, multiteam system, and platform organization) compared with the traditional forms of organization (i.e., linear, matrix, and business unit organization, among others). This study proposes a three-dimensional (3D) magic-cube organizational structure, considering the product dimensions, business, and administration. Moreover, the characteristics, propositions of system operation, system dynamic model, and working model of the 3D magic-cube organization are described. Finally, the 3D model is applied in a Chinese manufacturing firm to test its effectiveness. By redesigning the post and pay system, the pilot organization establishes a project-driven and cross-functional coordination mechanism, positively affecting the firm’s financial profit, output value, labor productivity, and income of per capita. The proposed 3D model can be adopted by large- or medium-sized manufacturing firms for product development and innovation. The implications of both practice and theory are also discussed in this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler R, Hiromoto T (2012). Amoeba management: Lessons from Japan’s Kyocera. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54(1): 83–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler R, Hiromoto T, Suzuki H (2020). Amoeba management and organizational ambidexterity: Similarities, differences, and implications for organizational fit and success. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 69(2): 405–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annosi M C, Brunetta F (2017). New Organizational Forms, Controls, and Institutions: Understanding the Tensions in “Post-Bureaucratic” Organizations. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo C, Santalo J (2013). Platform competition: Strategic tradeoffs in platform markets. Strategic Management Journal, 34(11): 1331–1350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciborra C U (1996). The platform organization: Recombining strategies, structures, and surprises. Organization Science, 7(2): 103–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clement J, Puranam P (2018). Searching for structure: Formal organization design as a guide to network evolution. Management Science, 64(8): 3879–3895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross R L, Yan A, Louis M R (2000). Boundary activities in “Bound-aryless” organizations: A case study of a transformation to a team-based structure. Human Relations, 53(6): 841–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cusumano M A, Yoffie D B, Gawer A (2020). The future of platforms. MIT Sloan Management Review, 61(3): 46–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour F (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 555–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daugherty P J, Chen H, Ferrin B G (2011). Organizational structure and logistics service innovation. International Journal of Logistics Management, 22(1): 26–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison R B, Hollenbeck J R, Barnes C M, Sleesman D J, Ilgen D R (2012). Coordinated action in multiteam systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(4): 808–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries T A, Walter F, van der Vegt G S, Essens P J M D (2014)). Antecedents of individuals’ interteam coordination: Broad functional experiences as a mixed blessing. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5): 1334–1359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan R (1979). What is the right organization structure? Decision tree analysis provides the answer. Organizational Dynamics, 7(3): 59–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawer A (2014). Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy, 43(7): 1239–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghislanzoni G, Penttinen R, Turnbull D (2008). The multilocal challenge: Managing cross-border functions. McKinsey Quarterly, 2: 70–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Iranmanesh M, Kumar K M, Foroughi B, Mavi R K, Min N H (2021). The impacts of organizational structure on operational performance through innovation capability: Innovative culture as moderator. Review of Managerial Science, 15(7): 1885–1911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg K C, Valentine M A, Christin A (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1): 366–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut B, Zander U (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3): 383–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler E E, Worley C G (2006). Designing organizations that are built to change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 48(1): 19–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin A Y, Volberda H W (1999). Prolegomena on co-evolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10(5): 519–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Tao Y (2016). How to obtain line manager’s identification with HR issues? The influence of HR manager’s on business department manager’s commitment. Human Resources Development of China, 360(18): 42–50 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Li D H (2000). History, present and future for the change of enterprise organization structure. Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 15(3): 27–33 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Li P, Yang Z Y (2018). “Three platforms”: A future-oriented ecological organization paradigm. Business Review, (11): 92–105 (in Chinese)

  • Lin R H, Li W A (2000). Network organization: An organization model well adapting to the environment. Nankai Business Review, (3): 4–7 (in Chinese)

  • Lu Y, Ramamurthy K (2011). Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: An empirical examination. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 35(4): 931–954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu J E, Marks M A, Zaccaro S J (2001). Multi-team systems. In: Anderson N, Ones D S, Sinangil H K, Viswesvaran C, eds. Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology. London: Sage, 289–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Mei S E, Xie G (2013). Client-internal business/IT alignment, governance of IT outsourcing relationships and service quality. Management Review, 25(7): 132–142 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg H (2007). Tracking Strategies: Toward a General Theory. New York: Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Podolny J M, Page K L (1998). Network forms of organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1): 57–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porck J P, Matta F K, Hollenbeck J R, Oh J K, Lanaj K, Lee S M (2019). Social identification in multiteam systems: The role of depletion and task complexity. Academy of Management Journal, 62(4): 1137–1162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter M E, Heppelmann J E (2015). How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harvard Business Review, 93(10): 96–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Ren H (2005). Modern Enterprise Organization Design. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Samimi E, Sydow J (2021). Human resource management in project-based organizations: Revisiting the permanency assumption. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 32(1): 49–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandhu S, Kulik C T (2019). Shaping and being shaped: How organizational structure and managerial discretion co-evolve in new managerial roles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(3): 619–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahani J (2020). Limits and Opportunities of a Matrix Organization: A Study of Coordination Mechanisms within a Multiple Brand Organization. Wiesbaden: Springer

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steigenberger N (2016). Organizing for the big one: A review of case studies and a research agenda for multi-agency disaster response. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 24(2): 60–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun G Q (2001). The definition, characteristics and forming factors of network organization. Nankai Business Review, (4): 38–40 (in Chinese)

  • Thoben K D, Wiesner S, Wuest T (2017). Industrie 4.0 and smart manufacturing: A review of research issues and application examples. International Journal of Automotive Technology, 11(1): 4–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner S G, Utley D R, Westbrook J D (1998). Project managers and functional managers: A case study of job satisfaction in a matrix organization. Project Management Journal, 29(3): 11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Bunderen L, Greer L L, van Knippenberg D (2018). When interteam conflict spirals into intrateam power struggles: The pivotal role of team power structures. Academy of Management Journal, 61(3): 1100–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Laar E, van Deursen A J A M, van Dijk J A G M, de Haan J (2019). Determinants of 21st-century digital skills: A large-scale survey among working professionals. Computers in Human Behavior, 100: 93–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor B, Blackburn R S (1987). Interdependence: An alternative conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 12(3): 486–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei Y, Samiee S, Lee R P (2014). The influence of organic organizational cultures, market responsiveness, and product strategy on firm performance in an emerging market. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(1): 49–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiang Q (2013a). Aero-engine Maintenance Engineering Management. Beijing: China Machine Press (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiang Q (2013b). Recognition and practice on remanufacturing engineering management of military aero-engines. Strategic Study of CAE, 15(11): 67–73 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiang Q (2014). Building a new normal, upgraded China’s aviation MRO under the guidance of creative economy theory. Military Industry Culture, (12): 37–39 (in Chinese)

  • Xiang Q (2015). Discussion on problem-based engineering management system. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 2(3): 249–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanzi A (1987). How organic is your organization? Determinants of organic/mechanistic tendencies in a public accounting firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24(2): 125–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang C, Hu Z, Gu F F (2008). Intra- and inter-firm coordination of export manufacturers: A cluster analysis of indigenous Chinese exporters. Journal of International Marketing, 16(3): 108–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aero Engine Corporation of China (AECC), Beijing, 100097, China

    Qiao Xiang

  2. Chengdu Holy Industry & Commerce Corp., Ltd. (Group), Pengzhou, 611936, China

    You Zhang & Jie Zhong

  3. School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430074, China

    Guoxuan Wang & Lirong Long

Authors
  1. Qiao Xiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. You Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jie Zhong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Guoxuan Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lirong Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guoxuan Wang.

Additional information

This study is supported by the Key Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 72132001).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xiang, Q., Zhang, Y., Zhong, J. et al. Construction of digital 3D magic-cube organization structure for innovation-driven manufacturing. Front. Eng. Manag. 10, 373–390 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-022-0237-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42524-022-0237-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation