Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Business Leadership and Market Competitiveness pp 91–109Cite as

Organizational Designing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 808 Accesses

Abstract

Organizations follow a certain path or track which they have created in accordance with their strategic planning. Like any other organizational process, the continuous innovation of design is required in order to ensure that it is effectively adapted to changes in the environment, organizational behavior, as well as collaborator attitudes and needs. It has become trendy to follow organizational design trends, as they are typically in tune with environmental changes; however, design challenges lie within the organization rather than outside it; that is, while trends are informative, following them is complex. Shifts in competition paradigms are telling of organizational designing efforts, environmental receptiveness, as well as the effectiveness of their test of time; however, it is the organization’s innovativeness that will lead to a design that drives responsiveness and the co-creation of value.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • AbdEllatif, M., Farhan, M. S., & Shehata, N. S. (2018, June). Overcoming business process reengineering obstacles using ontology-based knowledge map methodology. Future Computing and Informatics Journal, 3(1), 7–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja, M. K., & Carley, K. M. (1999, November–December). Network structure in virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10(6), 693–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bao, T., & Wang, Y. (2012, September). Incomplete contract, bargaining and optimal divisional structure. Journal of Economics, 107(1), 81–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BBC. (2017, April 18). ‘There is no news’: What a change from 1930 to today. Retrieved May 24, 2018, from Entertainment & Arts: http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-39633603.

  • Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of American industrial enterprise. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clippinger, J. H. (1999). Order from the bottom up: Complex adaptive systems and their management. In J. H. Clippinger (Ed.), Order from the bottom up: Complex adaptive systems and their management. The biology of business: Decoding the natural laws of enterprise (pp. 1–30). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, C. (2005). Why the world is watching CNN. Retrieved May 24, 2018, from CNN’s impact around the world: http://edition.cnn.com/services/opk/cnn25/cnns_impact.htm.

  • Daft, R. L., Murphy, J., & Willmott, H. (2010). Organization theory and design. Andover: South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., & Short, J. E. (1990). The new industrial engineering: Information technology and business process redesign. Sloan Management Review, 31(4), 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidovitch, L., Parush, A., & Shtub, A. (2010). Simulator-based team training to share resources in a matrix structure organization. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 57(2), 288–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desa, S., Nagurka, M. L., & Ghosal, A. (1987, August 17–20). Product redesign for performance, manufacture, and assembly: A rational methodology towards total system design. International Conference on Engineering Design (pp. 1–10). Boston: ICED 87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl, M. J. (1994, March). The new and the old of business process redesign. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 3(1), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, K. D., Grover, V., & Teng, J. (1995). An empirical study of information technology enabled business process redesign and corporate competitive strategy. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(1), 17–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. R. (2002, May). Organizing to deliver solutions. Organizational Dynamics, 31(2), 194–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., & Ashford, S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haigh, N., Kennedy, E. D., & Walker, J. (2015). Hybrid organizations as shape-shifters: Altering legal structure for strategic gain. California Management Review, 57(3), 59–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business transformation. New York: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoetker, G. (2006, June). Do modular products lead to modular organizations? Strategic Management Journal, 27(6), 501–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isabella, L. A., & Waddock, S. A. (1994, August). Top management team certainty: Environmental assessments, teamwork, and performance implications. Journal of Management, 20(4), 835–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • MacQueen, K. M., Mclellan-Lemal, E., Bartholow, K., & Milstein, B. (2008). Team-based codebook development: Structure, process, and agreement. In G. Guest & K. M. MacQueen (Eds.), Handbook for team-based qualitative research (pp. 101–135). Lanham: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozcelik, Y. (2010, January). Do business process reengineering projects payoff? Evidence from the United States. International Journal of Project Management, 28(1), 7–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D. J. (2004). The modern firm: Organizational design for performance and growth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, M. K., Sushil, & Jain, P. K. (2010, July). Revisiting flexibility in organizations: Exploring its impact on performance. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 11(3), 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanford, N. (2005). Organization design. The collaborative approach. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinnilä, M. (1995). Strategic perspective to business process redesign. Business Process Re-engineering & Management Journal, 1(1), 44–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004, December). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2). Retrieved August 15, 2018, from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5/.

  • Yang, L., FitzPatrick, M., Varey, R., & Costley, C. (2015, June 10–13). Towards a holistic ‘sustainability’ for the mutual enhancement of humans and nature. 2nd International Social Business Conference. Anadolu: Anadolu University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Panamericana, Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico

    Andrée Marie López-Fernández

Authors
  1. Andrée Marie López-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

López-Fernández, A.M. (2019). Organizational Designing. In: Business Leadership and Market Competitiveness. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03347-7_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation