Cargando…

A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response

Structurally inert firms suffer elevated failure risks in the face of environmental change because inertia makes it difficult to keep pace with the speed of such change. Traditionally, this ecology theory based outlook focuses on the risks of mortality, treating the make-up of an organization’s arch...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schwarz, Gavin M., Yang, Kuo-Pin, Chou, Christine, Chiu, Yu-Jen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7223889/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9588-6
_version_ 1783533811670188032
author Schwarz, Gavin M.
Yang, Kuo-Pin
Chou, Christine
Chiu, Yu-Jen
author_facet Schwarz, Gavin M.
Yang, Kuo-Pin
Chou, Christine
Chiu, Yu-Jen
author_sort Schwarz, Gavin M.
collection PubMed
description Structurally inert firms suffer elevated failure risks in the face of environmental change because inertia makes it difficult to keep pace with the speed of such change. Traditionally, this ecology theory based outlook focuses on the risks of mortality, treating the make-up of an organization’s architecture as uniform and thus relatively inconsequential for understanding this hazard. Renewing recent debates on inertia and on structure, in this paper we examine the specifics of the make-up of structural inertia in the context of failure hazards—the measurable survival risks associated with failure. Developing a classification of structural inertia, we test a sample of 755 firms listed on the Taiwanese Security Exchange across 52 industries to develop a convention on organizational structure, ratifying that structural inertia differs by type in incorporating failure hazards. Findings differentiate between and elaborate the validating environmental and resource conditions for these different categories, detailing the extent to which failure hazards are related to the specifics of each type. This variation is helpful in explaining better why, despite conditions leading to failure, inert organizations continue to thrive over time. Discussing this logic addresses the narrow representation of structural inertia and limitations to its theoretical development over several decades. It also shows that traditional organizational ecology measures can be legitimately underplayed in organizations dealing with increased failure hazards in favor of the characteristics of different structural inertia types.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7223889
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72238892020-05-15 A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response Schwarz, Gavin M. Yang, Kuo-Pin Chou, Christine Chiu, Yu-Jen Asia Pac J Manag Article Structurally inert firms suffer elevated failure risks in the face of environmental change because inertia makes it difficult to keep pace with the speed of such change. Traditionally, this ecology theory based outlook focuses on the risks of mortality, treating the make-up of an organization’s architecture as uniform and thus relatively inconsequential for understanding this hazard. Renewing recent debates on inertia and on structure, in this paper we examine the specifics of the make-up of structural inertia in the context of failure hazards—the measurable survival risks associated with failure. Developing a classification of structural inertia, we test a sample of 755 firms listed on the Taiwanese Security Exchange across 52 industries to develop a convention on organizational structure, ratifying that structural inertia differs by type in incorporating failure hazards. Findings differentiate between and elaborate the validating environmental and resource conditions for these different categories, detailing the extent to which failure hazards are related to the specifics of each type. This variation is helpful in explaining better why, despite conditions leading to failure, inert organizations continue to thrive over time. Discussing this logic addresses the narrow representation of structural inertia and limitations to its theoretical development over several decades. It also shows that traditional organizational ecology measures can be legitimately underplayed in organizations dealing with increased failure hazards in favor of the characteristics of different structural inertia types. Springer US 2018-06-28 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7223889/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9588-6 Text en © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Article
Schwarz, Gavin M.
Yang, Kuo-Pin
Chou, Christine
Chiu, Yu-Jen
A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response
title A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response
title_full A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response
title_fullStr A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response
title_full_unstemmed A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response
title_short A classification of structural inertia: Variations in structural response
title_sort classification of structural inertia: variations in structural response
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7223889/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9588-6
work_keys_str_mv AT schwarzgavinm aclassificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT yangkuopin aclassificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT chouchristine aclassificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT chiuyujen aclassificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT schwarzgavinm classificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT yangkuopin classificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT chouchristine classificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse
AT chiuyujen classificationofstructuralinertiavariationsinstructuralresponse