Technology Choice, Transaction Alignment, and Survival: The Impact of Sub-Population Organizational Structure

Abstract

A recent stream of research in strategy has demonstrated the effect of boundary of the firm decisions on firm performance by integrating concepts and methods from organizational ecology with predictions from transaction cost economics (e.g. Silverman et al., 1997; Bigelow, 1999; Nickerson & Silverman, 2003; Argyres & Bigelow, 2005). This work has confirmed that managing organizational boundary choices (or governance structures) efficiently has ramifications for firms’ survival chances. But further questions delineating the conditions under which governance structure alignment has a greater or lesser effect on firm survival remain. In this paper, we consider how selection pressures may differ according to a firm's adoption of either a mature or an evolving technology. Using ecological insights regarding competitive intensity and sub-population density, we test for the evidence of the role of sub-population organizational (governance) structure within a technology class. We present preliminary results using an 18-year panel of the population of U.S. automobile manufacturers from 1916 to 1934.

The primary preliminary findings: Within a population, individual misalignment diminishes survival. However, the aggregate governance structure of firms within a technology sub-population has a greater effect on the survival of a focal firm than the governance choice of the individual firm. These findings suggest that governance choices in aggregate within technologically localized sub-populations may influence firm survival. Further, this paper adds to a body of work that utilizes ecological concepts to extend organizational theory.

Citation

Bigelow, L.S. (2006), "Technology Choice, Transaction Alignment, and Survival: The Impact of Sub-Population Organizational Structure", Baum, J.A.C., Dobrev, S.D. and Van Witteloostuijn, A. (Ed.) Ecology and Strategy (Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 23), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 301-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-3322(06)23010-9