01572nas a2200157   4500008004100000245007900041210006900120260000900189490000900198520106700207653001501274100001701289700001601306700002201322856007001344       2019                        eng d00aHow Managers Gain Their Employees Trust through Control and Trust-Building0 aHow Managers Gain Their Employees Trust through Control and Trus  c20190 v20193 aThis paper contributes to control-trust research by describing how the efforts managers make to demonstrate their trustworthiness (integrity, ability, benevolence) moderate the effects of managerial controls (output, process, social) on subordinate trust. Our survey of managers and subordinates indicates three conditions under which subordinate trust increases: when managers apply output controls and demonstrate their integrity; when managers apply process controls and demonstrate their ability; when managers apply social controls and demonstrate their benevolence. We argue that that these relationships exist because when managers demonstrate their trustworthiness in ways that facilitate the achievement of performance objectives (i.e., specified in the controls managers apply), subordinates are more confident that authorities are committed to protecting and promoting their interests. The paper concludes with a discussion about how these perspectives advance research on organizational control, organizational trust, and control-trust relationships.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aLong, Chris1 aHoltom, Brooks, C  uhttps://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.19068abstract01771nas a2200169   4500008004100000245010000041210006900141260000900210300001200219490000700231520123500238653001501473100001701488700001801505700001901523856005901542       2016                        eng d00aDelaying Change: Examining How Industry and Managerial Turbulence Impact Structural Realignment0 aDelaying Change Examining How Industry and Managerial Turbulence  c2016  a791-8170 v593 aThis paper examines when firms pursue structural realignment through business unit reconfiguration, specifically by recombining business units. Our results refine and extend contingency theory and studies of organization design by drawing on theories of decision avoidance and delay to describe environmental conditions when firms pursue or postpone structural realignment. Our empirical analysis of 46 firms from 1978 to 1997, operating within the U.S. medical device and pharmaceutical sectors, demonstrates that while decision makers initiate structural recombination during periods of industry growth (i.e., munificence), they reduce their recombination efforts during periods of industry turbulence (i.e., dynamism), and managerial turbulence (i.e., growth in top management team size). We also find evidence that firms delay realignment and bide their time for better environmental conditions of declining turbulence and industry growth before pursuing more structural realignment. Together, these findings suggest that decision makers often delay initiating structural recombination until they can effectively process information and assess how structural changes will help them realign the organization to the environment.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aKarim, Samina1 aLong, Chris, P  uhttps://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2012.040901427nas a2200157   4500008004100000245006600041210006600107260000900173490000900182520090100191653001501092100001401107700001701121700001901138856011201157       2016                        eng d00aHow Managers Foster Trust Through Control and Trustworthiness0 aHow Managers Foster Trust Through Control and Trustworthiness  c20160 v20163 aThis paper contributes to control-trust research by describing how the efforts managers make to demonstrate their trustworthiness (integrity, ability, benevolence) moderate the effects of managerial controls (output, process, social) on subordinate trust. Our survey of managers and subordinates indicates three conditions under which subordinate trust increases: when managers apply output controls and demonstrate their integrity; when managers apply process controls and demonstrate their ability; when managers apply social controls and demonstrate their benevolence. We argue that that these relationships exist because when managers demonstrate their trustworthiness in ways that facilitate the achievement of performance objectives (i.e., specified in the controls managers apply), subordinates are more confident that authorities are committed to protecting and promoting their interests.10aManagement1 aLong, Chs1 aCarroll, Tim1 aHoltom, Brooks  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/how-managers-foster-trust-through-control-and-trustworthiness01503nas a2200133   4500008004100000245006000041210005300101260000900154520107200163653001501235100001701250700002001267856008201287       2016                        eng d00aIs there a dark side of Big Data  point, counterpoint0 athere a dark side of Big Data point counterpoint  c20163 aHaakonsson and Carroll see two sides to Big Data. In his executive experience, Haakansson finds big data slows the decision making process and the implementation of decisions as well. Executives tend to wait for more data just because it is there. Is there a solution? Haakonsson argues that leadership based upon experience and courage is needed. Carroll sees a different world where we have continually improved tools which can automate the analyses of big data and give us answers quickly. That is, big data is not a problem, but a solution for executives. But there is also a problem; what are the right questions to ask? Without hypotheses, the questions are endless. Leaders must utilize their experience, intuition and insights to ask the right questions – not all the possible questions which big data can address. Is there a synthesis? Big data by itself is not necessarily a good thing; but it can be if leaders have the courage to move on in a timely manner where they ask the right questions – not all the questions possible that big data can address.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aHakonsson, Tore  uhttps://jorgdesign.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41469-016-0007-5#citeas01655nas a2200169   4500008004100000245010700041210006900148260000900217300001200226490000700238520109200245653001501337100001701352700003201369700001701401856006701418       2013                        eng d00aThe Structural Properties of Sustainable, Continuous Change: Achieving Reliability Through Flexibility0 aStructural Properties of Sustainable Continuous Change Achieving  c2013  a179-2050 v493 aRecent studies show that the relationship between structure and inertia in changing environments may be more complex than previously held and that the theoretical logics tying inertia with flexibility and efficiency remain incomplete. Using a computational model, this article aims to clarify this relationship by exploring what structural properties enable continuous change in inertia-generating organizations and what their performance consequences are in dynamic environments. The article has three main findings: First, employing managers who anticipate change is not enough to generate continuous change; it is also necessary to raise both the rate of responsiveness and desired performance. Second, continuous change increases average organizational performance and reduces its variation. Third, organizations’ capacity for continuous change is counterintuitively limited by the organizations’ capacity to build inertia. These are important insights, because they suggest that with the right design, organizations may be both more flexible and reliable than commonly believed.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aHåkonsson, Dorthe, Døjbak1 aKlaas, Peter  uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/002188631246452001222nas a2200157   4500008004100000245008000041210006900121260000900190300000900199490000600208520072600214653001500940100001700955700002300972856006900995       2012                        eng d00aA contingency approach to designing project organizations: theory and tools0 acontingency approach to designing project organizations theory a  c2012  a5-140 v23 aMany firms have increasingly come to rely on projects as a fundamental approach to organizing work. Yet understanding the best way to organize projects is a challenge, given the various contingencies that impact project success. We focus here on three contingency-based project organization design tools (the design structure matrix, OrgCon™ and SimVision™) that help to manage project complexity and ensure project success by identifying misfits or misalignments between organizational elements. We discuss the application of these models to a large National Aeronautics and Space Administration project as an example. We conclude with a consideration of how the existing tools are useful, and where they fall short.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aBurton, Richard, M  uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21573727.2011.64111801143nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006100041210006100102260000900163300001200172490000600184520071100190653001500901100001700916856006400933       2012                        eng d00aDesigning organizations for exploration and exploitation0 aDesigning organizations for exploration and exploitation  c2012  a5 pages0 v13 aAll organizations face the core challenge of deciding on investments in two very different types of activities: exploration and exploitation. Exploration activities are future-oriented, such as developing new capabilities, experimenting with new technologies, and pursuing new customers and markets. Exploitation activities, in contrast, focus on the refinement of existing competencies, processes, and products. Because an organization’s design should reflect its goals, it is difficult to accommodate exploration and exploitation activities within a single organization. This article discusses four major approaches used to tackle this problem, and notes the strengths and limitations of each approach.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim  uhttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=218475802001nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008300041210006900124260000900193490000900202520146600211653001501677100001701692700001901709856012701728       2012                        eng d00aHow Managers' Trust and Control Activities Influence Subordinates' Perceptions0 aHow Managers Trust and Control Activities Influence Subordinates  c20120 v20123 aThis paper refines and extends ideas about control-trust dynamics in two ways. First, we describe a theory of managerial action that outlines how managers integrate their efforts to apply controls and demonstrate their trustworthiness. We observe that managers attempt to promote superior-subordinate cooperation by linking their applications of output controls with demonstrations of their reliability, process controls with demonstrations of their competence, and social controls with demonstrations of their benevolence. Second, we demonstrate how the ways that managers combine efforts to apply controls and demonstrate their trustworthiness differentially influence the trust that subordinates have in their managers and the extent to which subordinates perceive they are controlled by them. When managers couple their efforts to apply output or social controls with efforts to demonstrate their reliability and benevolence respectively, subordinates perceive that their managers are motivated by trustworthy intentions and not by desires to control them. However, when managers couple their efforts to apply process controls with efforts to demonstrate their competence, subordinates’ perceive that their managers are motivated by a desire to control them, and not by trustworthy intentions. The paper concludes with a discussion of how this perspective advances research on organizational control, organizational trust, and trust-control relationships.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aLong, Chris, P  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/how-managers-trust-and-control-activities-influence-subordinates-perceptions01232nas a2200157   4500008004100000245005500041210005300096260000900149300001200158490000600170520075500176653001500931100001700946700001800963856009300981       2011                        eng d00aA framework of organisations as dynamic structures0 aframework of organisations as dynamic structures  c2011  a230-2460 v33 aThis paper integrates advances in organisational structure research into a broader framework of 'structural action' that depicts organisations as dynamic structures. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the main contributions from various theories and perspectives that have all informed our understanding of the impact of organisational structure on strategic change. We propose that organisational structures, as one mechanism by which strategy is enacted, are moulded purposefully and in different ways. To better understand how organisations are re-designed, the framework recommends particular structural actions depending on the turbulence (both internal and external) and performance (both actual and aspired) aspects of the organisation.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aKarim, Samina  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/framework-organisations-dynamic-structures00535nas a2200133   4500008004100000245008300041210006900124260000900193653001500202100001700217700003000234700001700264856012000281       2009                        eng d00aOrganizational Adaptation, Continuous Change, and the Positive Role of Inertia0 aOrganizational Adaptation Continuous Change and the Positive Rol  c200910aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aHakonsson, Dorthe, Dojbak1 aKlaas, Peter  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/organizational-adaptation-continuous-change-and-positive-role-inertia01210nas a2200157   4500008004100000245004600041210004600087260000900133300001000142490000600152520075600158653001500914100001700929700001400946856009200960       2009                        eng d00aPredicting Organizational Reconfiguration0 aPredicting Organizational Reconfiguration  c2009  a79-970 v83 aThis chapter addresses the issue of structural change within for-profit organizations, both as adaptation to changing markets and as purposeful experimentation to search for new opportunities, and builds upon the “reconfiguration” construct. In the areas of strategy, evolutionary economics, and organization theory, there are conflicting theories that either predict structural change or discuss obstacles to change. Our aim is to highlight relevant theoretical rationales for why and when organizations would, or would not, be expected to undertake structural reconfiguration. We conclude with remarks on how these literatures, together, inform our understanding of reconfiguration and organization design and provide insights for practitioners.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aKarim, S.  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/predicting-organizational-reconfiguration00607nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009600041210006900137260000900206300001000215490000700225520011100232653001500343100001700358856008600375       2008                        eng d00aMark E. Nissen: Harnessing Knowledge Dynamics: Principled Organizational Knowing & Learning0 aMark E Nissen Harnessing Knowledge Dynamics Principled Organizat  c2008  a52-550 v143 aHarnessing Knowledge Dynamics: Principled Organizational Knowing & Learning by Mark E. Nissen is reviewed.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim  uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/201657890?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true01203nas a2200193   4500008004100000245009000041210006900131260000900200300001200209490000700221520053000228653001500758100001700773700002300790700002400813700002300837700002200860856012700882       2006                        eng d00aDesigning a New Organization at NASA: An Organization Design Process Using Simulation0 aDesigning a New Organization at NASA An Organization Design Proc  c2006  a171-3120 v173 aThe challenge for NASA’s Systems Analysis Integrated Discipline Team (SAIDT) is to develop a new organization design capable of performing complex modeling and analysis tasks, using team members at various NASA centers. The focus is on: (1) design as a process, (2) the effect of design tools on the process as well as alternative designs, (3) the fit between the tools and their fit with the organization, (4) the effect of an ongoing agency-wide transformation, and (5) implications for organizational contingency theory.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aGormley, Thomas, J1 aBilardo, Vincent, J1 aBurton, Richard, M1 aWoodman, Keith, L  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/designing-new-organization-nasa-organization-design-process-using-simulation01114nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008300041210006900124260000900193300001200202520058700214653001500801100001700816700001900833856011600852       2006                        eng d00aOrganization Design, Organizational Learning, and the Market Value of the Firm0 aOrganization Design Organizational Learning and the Market Value  c2006  a125-1423 aWe compare market returns associated with firms’ creation of new units focused on e-business. Two aspects of organization design - governance and leadership - are considered with regard to exploitation- and exploration-oriented organization learning. We find that exploitation in governance (high centralization) is associated with a lower mean and variance in returns; that exploitation in leadership (appointment of outsiders) is associated with the same mean yet higher variance; and, among units exhibiting both modes of learning, the variance of returns are <i>not</i> equal.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aHunter, S., D.  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/organization-design-organizational-learning-and-market-value-firm02062nas a2200157   4500008004100000245006600041210006500107260000900172300001200181490000600193520155000199653001501749100001701764700002301781856010001804       2000                        eng d00aOrganizations and complexity: Searching for the edge of chaos0 aOrganizations and complexity Searching for the edge of chaos  c2000  a319-3370 v63 aTraditional organizational theory advocates increased differentiation and horizontal integration for organizations in unstable environments or with uncertain technologies. This paper seeks to develop a better understanding of the relationship of group structure and the level of interdependency between individuals on group performance under various task complexities. Complexity theory in general, and NK models in particular, are introduced as theoretical frameworks that offer an explanation for group performance. Simulation models are developed, based on the communication network research of Bavelas (1948) and Leavitt (1952), to explore the effects of decentralization and interdependence. The simulation model developed here shows general consistency with previous human subject experiments. However, contrary to predictions, not all decentralized group structures perform well when undertaking complex task assignments. Structures that are highly connected (actors communicating with all others) perform much worse than those with a lower level of connection. Further experiments varying both the number of actors and the degree of interdependence between them find evidence of the “edge of chaos.” This research advances our understanding of organizations beyond earlier models by suggesting that there is an optimal range of interconnectedness between actors or tasks that explains the variation in performance. An intriguing result is that this optimal level of interdependence is fairly low, regardless of the size of the group.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aBurton, Richard, M  uhttps://stage.business.oregonstate.edu/biblio/organizations-and-complexity-searching-edge-chaos01662nas a2200169   4500008004100000245004800041210004400089260000900133300001200142490000700154520119600161653001501357100001701372700001901389700001901408856006501427       1999                        eng d00aThe coevolution of new organizational forms0 acoevolution of new organizational forms  c1999  a535-5500 v103 aThis paper outlines an alternative theory of organization-environment coevolution that generalizes a model of organization adaptation first proposed by March (1991), linking firm-level exploration and exploitation adaptations to changes in the population of organizations. The theory considers organizations, their populations, and their environments as the interdependent outcome of managerial actions, institutional influences, and extra-institutional changes (technological, sociopolitical, and other environmental phenomena). In particular, the theory incorporates potential differences and equifinal outcomes related to country-specific variation. The basic theses of this paper are that firm strategic and organization adaptations coevolve with changes in the environment (competitive dynamics, technological, and institutional) and organization population and forms, and that new organizational forms can mutate and emerge from the existing population of organizations. The theory has guided a multicountry research collaboration on strategic and organization adaptations and the mutation and emergence of new organizational forms from within the existing population of organizations.10aManagement1 aCarroll, Tim1 aLong, Chris, P1 aLewin, Arie, Y  uhttps://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.10.5.535