|مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع|
|مقالات ترجمه شده مدیریت|
کد محصول: M768
قیمت فایل ترجمه شده: برای اطلاع از هزینه و مدت زمان انجام ترجمه با پشتیبانی وب سایت تماس حاصل نمایید (۰۹۳۷۲۵۵۵۲۴۰)
تعداد صفحه انگلیسی: ۱۸
سال نشر: ۲۰۱۸
مقاله انگلیسی مدیریت ۲۰۱۸ : تأثیر ساختار سازمانی بر ظرفیت جذب با میانجی گری انرژی سازمانی مولد
Productive organizational energy mediates the impact of organizational structure on absorptive capacity
The ability of an organization to cope with radical technological change is regarded to be heavily dependent on its ability to absorb and apply knowledge from its environment. This study investigates the role of organizational structure in driving absorptive capacity and uncovers the role of the emergent phenomenon of organizational energy as the enabler of this relationship. A field study was conducted among firms that are challenged by the disruptive nature of Cloud computing. Our results show that organizational design affects the degree of mobilization of an organization’s affective, cognitive and behavioral resources, which in turn influence the effectiveness of learning processes related to the absorption and exchange of knowledge within the organization.
Furthermore, they reveal the positive relationship between the enactment of absorptive capacity and the successful adoption of Cloud technology for incumbent firms. The findings contribute to our understanding of the micro-foundations of absorptive capacity and how positive organizational phenomena facilitate effective adoption and implementation of emerging technologies.
Keywords : Dynamic capabilities,Affect/emotions,Organizational learning, Technology adoption
Rapid technological change constitutes a powerful competitive force that bears significant strategic implications for organizations (Adner, 2002; Day et al., 2004; Hamilton, 1985). Schumpeter (1934) famously described such technological change as a force of “creative destruction” which can erode or reinforce the competitive advantage of all firms involved in the affected industries. Firms and organizations operating in such environments, however, are not completely at the mercy of said forces. Predicting and managing the implications of such change has been found to be related to the ability of organizations to absorb and utilize knowledge from their environment, i.e. their absorptive capacity (Grant, 1996; Lane et al., 2006; Zander and Kogut, 1995).
Recent empirical research has shed light on the antecedents of absorptive capacity by constructively synthesizing theories of learning, managerial cognition, the knowledge-based view of the firm and dynamic capabilities (for a review see Volberda et al., 2010). Consequently, extant studies have revealed a breadth of contributing factors, traced at different levels of analysis, such as managerial, inter-organizational, intra-organizational or environmental. At the intra-organizational level, organizational design has been identified as a key factor that has amajor influence on absorptive capacity (Van den Bosch et al., 1999).
By organizational design, we refer to the “formal allocation of work roles and the administrative mechanisms to control and integrate work activities including those who cross formal organizational boundaries” (Child, 1972: p.2). Unfortunately, despite the theoretical weight put on organizational design in relation to supporting absorptive capacity, empirical evidence remains limited and agreement on the nature of the relationship between structural attributes and organizational capabilities is lacking (Volberda et al., 2010). Moreover, empirical research is yet to enquire the underlying mechanisms that drive this relationship.
By adopting a positive organizational scholarship (POS) lens (Cameron and Caza, 2004; Cameron et al., 2003; Luthans and Youssef, 2007; Luthans and Church, 2002), the current study aims to reveal the collective psychological underpinnings of absorptive capacity and how they are influenced by organizational characteristics such as organizational design (i.e. degree of centralization and formalization). POS is concerned with both personal fulfillment and the “long-term sustainability of people, organizations, society, and the environment” (Spreitzer and Cameron, 2012: 1037). As such, it puts emphasis on the generative dynamics that lead to sought-after positive organizational outcomes (Meyers et al., 2013) by looking at the role of employee strengths and positive states on shaping important individual- and organizational-level outcomes (Steele et al., 2012).