Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Organization Studies
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Palmer, I.
Right arrow Articles by Dunford, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

New Organizational Forms: Towards a Generative Dialogue

Ian Palmer

Faculty of Business, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, Ian.Palmer{at}uts.edu.au

Jodie Benveniste

Faculty of Business, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, hotlaksa{at}internode.on.net

Richard Dunford

Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia, Richard.Dunford{at}gsm.mq.edu.au

The concept of `new organizational forms' has been with us for over 20 years, but little attention has been given to the diverse assumptions underlying various researchers' use of this term. We identify five areas where different assumptions are in use, underpinned by a variety of theoretical perspectives. We urge scholars to engage in a generative dialogue about new organizational forms across theoretical perspectives. The aim of a generative dialogue is to identify where areas of agreement about new organizational forms can be achieved and where differences can be accepted and respected.

Key Words: new organizational forms • knowledge • generative dialogue

References

  • Ahuja, M., and K. Carley 1999 `Network structure in virtual organizations'. Organization Science 10: 741—757.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Alexander, P., D. Schallert, and V. Hare 1991 `Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge'. Review of Educational Research 61: 315—343.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Ashcraft, K. 2001 `Organized dissonance: Feminist bureaucracy as hybrid form '. Academy of Management Journal 44: 1301—1322.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Ashkenas, R., D. Ulrich, T. Jick, and S. Kerr 1995 The boundaryless organization: Breaking the chains of organizational structure. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Astley, W., and R. Zammuto 1992 `Organization science, managers, and language games', Organization Science 3: 443—466.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Baden-Fuller, C., and H. Volberda 1997 `Strategic renewal'. International Studies of Management and Organization 27: 95—120.
  • Barley, S. 1996 `Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organization studies'. Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 404—441.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Bartlett, C., and S. Ghoshal 1993 `Beyond the M-form: Toward a managerial theory of the firm '. Strategic Management Journal 14: 23—46.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Bhide, A. 2000 `David and Goliath, reconsidered'. Harvard Business Review 78: 26—27.
  • Bicchieri, C. 1988 `Should scientists abstain from metaphor?' in The consequecnes of economic rhetoric. A. Klamer, D. McCloskey and R. Solow (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bigley, G., and K. Roberts 2001 `The incident command system: High-reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments'. Academy of Management Journal 44: 1281—1299.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Bouwen, R. 1998 `Relational construction of meaning in emerging organization contexts'. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 7: 299—319.[CrossRef]
  • Brown, J., and D. Cooper 1996 `Strategic alliances within a big-six accounting firm'. International Studies of Management and Organization 26: 59—79.
  • Bruderer, E., and J. Singh 1996 `Organizational evolution, learning, and selection: A genetic-algorithm-based model'. Academy of Management Journal 39: 1322—1349.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Brynjolfsson, E., and A. Renshaw 1997 `The matrix of change'. Sloan Management Review 38: 37—54.[Web of Science]
  • Burrell, G., and G. Morgan 1979 Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. London: Heinemann.
  • Cannella, A., and L. Paetzold 1994 `Pfeffer's barriers to the advance of organizational science: A rejoinder'. Academy of Management Review 19: 331—341.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Cattini, G., J. Pennings, and F. Wezel 2003 `Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in founding patterns '. Organization Science 14: 670—685.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Chakravarthy, B., and M. Gargiulo 1998 `Maintaining leadership legitimacy in the transition to new organizational forms'. Journal of Management Studies 35: 437—456.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Child, J., and R. McGrath 2001 `Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an information-intensive econonmy'. Academy of Management Journal 44: 1135—1148.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Child, J., and S. Rodrigues 2003 `Corporate governance and new organizational forms: Issues of double and multiple agency'. Journal of Management and Governance 7: 337—360.[CrossRef]
  • Choi, J. 2002 `External activities and team effectiveness: Review and theoretical development'. Small Group Research 33: 181—208.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Coff, R. 1999 `When competitive advantage doesn't lead to performance: The resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power'. Organization Science 10: 119—132.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Conner, D. 2003 `Social comparison in virtual work environments: An examination of contemporary referent selection'. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 76: 133—147.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Cross, R., A. Yan, and M. Louis 2000 `Boundary activities in "boundaryless" organisations: A case study of a transformation to a team-based structure'. Human Relations 37: 563—585.
  • Czarniawska, B. 1998 `Who is afraid of incommensurability?' Organization 5: 273—275.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Davidow, W., and M. Malone 1992 The virtual corporation: Structuring and revitalizing the organization for the 21st century. New York: Harper Collins.
  • Davies, A., and J.A. Fitchett 2005 `Beyond incommensurability? Empirical expansion on diversity in research' European Journal of Marketing 39/3—4: 272—293
  • De Cock, C., and E.L. Jeanes 2006 `Questioning consensus, cultivating conflict'. Journal of Management Inquiry 15/1: 18—30.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Deetz, S. 2003 `Reclaiming the legacy of the linguistic turn'. Organization 10: 421—429.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • DeSanctis, G., and P. Monge 1999 `Introduction to the special issue: Communication processes for virtual organizations'. Organization Science 10: 693—703.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Dess, G., A. Rasheed, K. McLaughlin, and R. Priem 1995 `The new corporate architecture'. Academy of Management Executive 9: 7—20.
  • Dibrell, C., and R. Miller 2002 `Organization design: The continuing influence of information technology'. Management Decision 40: 620—627.[CrossRef]
  • Dijksterhuis, M., and F. Van den Bosch 1999 `Where do new organizational forms come from? Management logics as a source of coevolution'. Organization Science 10: 569—582.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • DiMaggio, P. 2001 `Introduction: Making sense of the contemporary firm and prefiguring its future' in The twenty-first-century firm: Changing economic organization in international perspective. P. DiMaggio (ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Dunford, R., I. Palmer, J. Benveniste, and J. Crawford 2007 `Co-existence of `old' and `new' organizational practices: Transitory phenomena or enduring feature?' Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources 45: 24—43.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Ferlie, E., and A. Pettigrew 1996 `The nature and transformations of corporate headquarters: A review of recent literature and a research agenda'. Journal of Management Studies 33: 495—523.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Foss, N. 2002a `New organizational forms — critical perspectives '. International Journal of the Economics of Business 9: 1—7.[CrossRef]
  • Foss, N. 2002b `Coase vs Hayek': Economic organization and the knowledge economy'. International Journal of the Economics of Business 9: 9—35.[CrossRef]
  • Foss, K., and N. Foss 2002 `Authority and discretion: Tensions, credible delegation, and implications for new organizational forms'. http://www.cbs.dk/papers
  • Galunic, D., and K. Eisenhardt 2001 `Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms'. Academy of Management Journal 44: 1229—1249.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Gerard, G., and L. Ellinor 2001 Dialogue at work: Skills for leveraging collective understanding. Williston, VT: Pegasus.
  • Gergen, K., M. Gergen, and F. Barrett 2004 `Dialogue: Life and death of the organization' in The Sage handbook of organizational discourse. D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, and L. Putnam (eds), 39—59. London: Sage.
  • Gooderham, P., and S. Ulset 2002 `Beyond the M-form: Towards a critical test of the new form'. International Journal of the Economics of Business 9: 117—138.[CrossRef]
  • Greenwood, R., C. Hinings, and R. Suddaby 2002 `Theorizing change: The role of professional associations in the transformation of institutionalized firms'. Academy of Management Journal 45: 58—580.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Harder, J., P. Robertson, and H. Woodward 2004 `The spirit of the new workplace: Breathing life into organizations '. Organization Development Journal 22: 79—103.
  • Haverman, H. 2004 `Antebellum literary culture and the evolution of American magazines'. Poetics 32: 5—28.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Hill, S., R. Martin, and M. Harris 2000 `Decentralisation, integration and the post-bureaucratic organisation: The case of R&D'. Journal of Management Studies 37: 563—585.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Hirsch, P., and M. Lounsbury 1997 `Putting the organization back into organization theory '. Journal of Management Inquiry 6: 79—88.[Free Full Text]
  • Holland, C., and A. Lockett 1997 `Mixed mode network structures: The strategic use of electronic communication by organizations'. Organization Science 8: 475—488.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Jackson, N., and P. Carter 1991 `In defence of paradigm incommensurability'. Organization Studies 12/1: 109—127.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Joyce, W., V. McGee, and J. Slocum 1997 `Designing lateral organizations: An analysis of the benefits, costs, and enablers of nonhierarchical organizational forms'. Decision Sciences 28: 1—24.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Judge, W., and J. Ryman 2001 `The shared leadership challenge in strategic alliances: Lessons from the US healthcare industry'. Academy of Management Executive 15: 71—79.[Web of Science]
  • Keenoy, T., R. Marshak, C. Oswick, and D. Grant 2000 `The discourses of organizing'. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36: 133—135.[Free Full Text]
  • Kopple, W. 1991 `Positions, thematic progressions, and some implications for understanding discourse'. Written Communication 8: 311—347.[Abstract]
  • Kuhn, T. 1962 The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lee-Kelley, L., A. Grossman, and A. Gannings 2004 `A social interaction approach to managing the "invisibles" of virtual teams'. Industrial Management and Data Systems 104: 650—657.[CrossRef]
  • Lewin, A., and H. Volberda 1999 `Prolegomena on coevolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms'. Organization Science 10: 519—534.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Lewin, A., C. Long, and T. Carroll 1999 `The coevolution of new organizational forms'. Organization Science 10: 535—550.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Lounsbury, M. 2002 `Institutional transformation and status mobility: The professionalization of the field of finance'. Academy of Management Journal 45: 255—266.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • MacLean, D. 2006 `Cultivating questions, consensual conflict? A commentary on "Questioning consensus, cultivating conflict'''. Journal of Management Inquiry 15,1: 31—32.[Free Full Text]
  • Mankin, D., and S. Cohen 1997 `Teams and technology: Tensions in participatory design '. Organizational Dynamics 26: 63—76.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Mathews, K.M., White, M.C., and R.G. Long 1999 `The problem of prediction and control in theoretical diversity and the promise of the complexity sciences'. Journal of Management Inquiry 8/1: 17—31[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Michalisin, M., R. Smith, and A. Kline 1997 `In search of strategic assets'. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 5: 360—387.
  • Miles, R., and C. Snow, J. Mathews, G. Miles, and H. Coleman 1997 `Organizing in the knowledge age: Anticipating the cellular form'. Academy of Management Executive 11: 7—24.
  • Oliver, A., and K. Montgomery 2000 `Creating a hybrid organizational form from parental blueprints: The emergence and evolution of knowledge firms'. Human Relations 53: 33—56.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Palmer, I., and R. Dunford 1997 `Organising for hyper-competition'. New Zealand Strategic Management 2: 38—45.
  • Palmer, I., and R. Dunford 2002 `Out with the old and in with the new? The relationship between traditional and new organizational practices'. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 10: 209—225.
  • Palmer, I., and C. Hardy 2000 Thinking about management: Implications of organizational debates for practice. London, Sage.
  • Peters, T. 1992 Liberation management: Necessary disorganization for the nanonsecond nineties. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
  • Peters, T. 1996 `We hold these truths to be self-evident (more or less) '. Organizational Dynamics 25: 27—32.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Pettigrew, A., and E. Fenton 2000a `Complexities and dualities in innovative forms of organizing' in The innovating organization. A. Pettigrew and E. Fenton (eds), 279—300. London: Sage.
  • Pettigrew, A., and E. Fenton 2000b `Theoretical perspectives on new forms of organizing' in The innovating organization. A. Pettigrew and E. Fenton (eds), 1—46. London: Sage.
  • Pettigrew, A., R. Whittington, L. Melin, C. Sanchez-Runde, F. Van den Bosch, and T. Numagami, editors 2003 Innovative forms of organising: International perspectives. London: Sage.
  • Pfeffer, J. 1993 `Barriers to the advance of organizational science: Paradigm development as a dependent variable'. Academy of Management Review 18: 599—620.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Pinchot, G., and E. Pinchot 1994 The end of bureaucracy and the rise of the intelligent organization. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
  • Powell, A., G. Piccoli, and B. Ives 2004 Virtual teams: A review of current literature and directions for future research'. Database for Advances in Information Systems 35: 6—36.
  • Purser, R., and S. Cabana 1998 The self-managing organization. New York: Free Press.
  • Quinn, J. 1992 `The intelligent organization: A new paradigm'. Academy of Management Executive 6: 48—63.
  • Raghuram, S., R. Gamd, B. Wiesenfeld, and V. Guptaa 2001 `Factors contributing to virtual work adjustment'. Journal of Management 27: 383—405.[Abstract]
  • Rindova, V., and S. Kotha 2001 `Continuous morphing: Competing through dynamic capabilities, form and function'. Academy of Management Journal 44: 1263—1280.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Rousseau, D., S. Sitkin, R. Burt, and C. Camerer 1998 `Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust'. Academy of Management Review 23: 393—404.[Web of Science]
  • Sanchez, R., and A. Heene 1997 `Managing for an uncertain future'. International Studies of Management and Organization 27: 21—42.
  • Schein, E. 1996 `Career anchors revisited: Implications for career development in the 21st century'. Academy of Management Executive 10: 80—88.
  • Scherer, A.G., and H. Steinmann 1999 `Some remarks on the problem of incommensurability in organization studies'. Organizatioin Studies 20/3: 519—544.
  • Steier, L. 1998 `Confounding market and hierarchy in venture capital governance: The Canadian immigrant investor program'. Journal of Management Studies 35: 511—535.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Straub, D., and E. Karahanna 1998 `Knowledge worker communications and recipient availability: Toward a task closure explanation of media choice'. Organization Science 9: 160—175.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Tushman, M., and C. O'Reilly 1997 Winning through innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  • Umanath, N. 2003 `The concept of contingency beyond "It depends": Illustrations from IS research stream'. Information and Management 40: 551—570.[CrossRef]
  • Volberda, H. 1996 `Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments'. Organization Science 7: 359—374.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Watkins-Mathys, L., and S. Lowe 2005 `Small business and entrepreneurship research: The way through paradigm incommensurability'. International Small Business Journal 23/6: 657—677[Abstract]
  • Weaver, G.R., and D.A. Gioia 1994 `Paradigms lost: Incommensurability vs structurationist inquiry'. Organization Studies 15/4: 565—590.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Weick, K. 1999 `Theory construction as disciplined reflexivity: Tradeoffs in the 90s'. Academy of Management Review 24: 797—806.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Weinstein, D., and M.A. Weinstein 1998 `Is postmodern organization theory skeptical?' Journal of Management History 4/4: 350—362.
  • Wenger, E., and W. Snyder 2000 `Communities of practice: The organizational frontier'. Harvard Business Review 78: 139—145.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Westenholz, A., J. Pedersen, and F. Dobbin 2006 `Institutions in the making: Identity, power, and the emergence of new organizational forms'. The American Behavioral Scientist 49: 889—896.[Free Full Text]
  • Whittington, R., A. Pettigrew, S. Peck, E. Fenton, and M. Conyon 1999 `Change and complementarities in the new competitive landscape: A European panel study, 1992—1996'. Organization Science 10: 183—194.
  • Willmott, H. 1993 `Breaking the paradigm mentality'. Organization Studies 14/5: 681—719.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This version was published on December 1, 2007

Organization Studies, Vol. 28, No. 12, 1829-1847 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0170840607079531
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Palmer, I.
Right arrow Articles by Dunford, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?