A majority of organized brick-and-mortar lifestyle retailers in India believe that the brick-and-mortar retailing model ensures economies of scale as they keep opening new stores. Having more stores might help retailers to gain product sourcing advantages in addition to generating additional revenue to the firm but at the same time, it fails to provide any other benefits towards economies of scale as every new store comes with new one-time capital expenditures and recurring fixed expenses. Another misconception is that lifestyle retailing must follow an organizational structure (OS) that is adopted by their parent company and hence a majority of OS adopted by lifestyle retailers in India is dependent on organizational form. This study was not limited to just recommending a rational OS based on exploratory research and existing theories in the OS domain. Once the ROLS-b was designed, we have experimented with the proposed rational OS on one of the ten lifestyle retailers in the study to test the validity and reliability. Experimentation results empirically and qualitatively demonstrate that the existing belief of brick-and-mortar lifestyle retailers in India which assumes economies of scale and long-term firm’s sustainability as the retailer increases the store count is just a misconception and does not hold. On the other hand, when we experimented the ROLS-b for over twelve months at over 25 percent stores of a select retailer, results demonstrate that these stores which have gone through the treatment have shown 5.34 times improvement in the store-level profit and 1.97 times in the firm-level profit in addition to eliminating a majority of gaps found in the existing OS that was leading to diseconomies of scale and deteriorating firm’s performance.
{"title":"Rational Organizational Structure: For Brick-and-Mortar Lifestyle Retailers in India to Overcome Diseconomies of Scale and Protect Firm’s Sustainability (ROLS-b)","authors":"Ganesha H. R., P. Aithal","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3678752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3678752","url":null,"abstract":"A majority of organized brick-and-mortar lifestyle retailers in India believe that the brick-and-mortar retailing model ensures economies of scale as they keep opening new stores. Having more stores might help retailers to gain product sourcing advantages in addition to generating additional revenue to the firm but at the same time, it fails to provide any other benefits towards economies of scale as every new store comes with new one-time capital expenditures and recurring fixed expenses. Another misconception is that lifestyle retailing must follow an organizational structure (OS) that is adopted by their parent company and hence a majority of OS adopted by lifestyle retailers in India is dependent on organizational form. This study was not limited to just recommending a rational OS based on exploratory research and existing theories in the OS domain. Once the ROLS-b was designed, we have experimented with the proposed rational OS on one of the ten lifestyle retailers in the study to test the validity and reliability. Experimentation results empirically and qualitatively demonstrate that the existing belief of brick-and-mortar lifestyle retailers in India which assumes economies of scale and long-term firm’s sustainability as the retailer increases the store count is just a misconception and does not hold. On the other hand, when we experimented the ROLS-b for over twelve months at over 25 percent stores of a select retailer, results demonstrate that these stores which have gone through the treatment have shown 5.34 times improvement in the store-level profit and 1.97 times in the firm-level profit in addition to eliminating a majority of gaps found in the existing OS that was leading to diseconomies of scale and deteriorating firm’s performance.","PeriodicalId":128420,"journal":{"name":"ORG: Organizational Structural Designs (Topic)","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130518577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite decades of research on both organization design and organizational routines, little research has analyzed the relationship between them. Here we propose a normative theory in which the effectiveness of organization design and redesign depends on the characteristics of routines. The analysis shows which types of organization designs may be useful as well as which design changes may or may not succeed depending on (a) the specificity of routines and (b) the dynamic versus static purposes of organizational routines.
{"title":"Fit between Organization Design and Organizational Routines","authors":"Constance E. Helfat, S. Karim","doi":"10.7146/JOD.16738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/JOD.16738","url":null,"abstract":"Despite decades of research on both organization design and organizational routines, little research has analyzed the relationship between them. Here we propose a normative theory in which the effectiveness of organization design and redesign depends on the characteristics of routines. The analysis shows which types of organization designs may be useful as well as which design changes may or may not succeed depending on (a) the specificity of routines and (b) the dynamic versus static purposes of organizational routines.","PeriodicalId":128420,"journal":{"name":"ORG: Organizational Structural Designs (Topic)","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114290706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
High Performance Work Systems are generally considered to have a positive impact on workers' well-being. But is this actually the case? This article will discuss this question from the point of view of "End of Fun", a controversial and widely-discussed book by Judith Mair (2003), claiming that traditional work systems provide a more beneficial work environment as well as better organizational performance. In order to do so, this article gives an introduction to High Performance Work Systems (HPWS) and discusses their components from the "End of Fun" perspective. In the process it gives an overview of the most important aspects of HWPS. Thus it can also be used in advanced management classes; so for this purpose teaching material is added in a separate document.
高绩效工作系统通常被认为对工人的福祉有积极的影响。但事实真的是这样吗?本文将从朱迪思·梅尔(Judith maair, 2003)的《乐趣的终结》(End of Fun)一书的角度来讨论这个问题，这本书引起了广泛的讨论，该书声称传统的工作系统提供了更有益的工作环境以及更好的组织绩效。为了做到这一点，本文将介绍高性能工作系统(HPWS)，并从“乐趣结束”的角度讨论它们的组成部分。在此过程中，它给出了HWPS的最重要的方面的概述。因此，它也可以用于高级管理课程;因此，为了这个目的，教学材料被添加到一个单独的文件中。
{"title":"High Performance Work Systems and the End of Fun: Do High Performance Work Systems Provide a More Human Work Environment?","authors":"Heike Nolte, Silke Haschen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1719403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1719403","url":null,"abstract":"High Performance Work Systems are generally considered to have a positive impact on workers' well-being. But is this actually the case? This article will discuss this question from the point of view of \"End of Fun\", a controversial and widely-discussed book by Judith Mair (2003), claiming that traditional work systems provide a more beneficial work environment as well as better organizational performance. In order to do so, this article gives an introduction to High Performance Work Systems (HPWS) and discusses their components from the \"End of Fun\" perspective. In the process it gives an overview of the most important aspects of HWPS. Thus it can also be used in advanced management classes; so for this purpose teaching material is added in a separate document.","PeriodicalId":128420,"journal":{"name":"ORG: Organizational Structural Designs (Topic)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127018353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper is a follow up to Robert Duncan's seminal article, "What is the Right Organization Structure?" published in Organization Dynamics in 1979. The purpose of this paper is to present key developments in organization structure and design since Duncan's article was published. The design developments are organized into three eras. Era 1was dominant until the late 1970s and included the use of traditional functional and divisional structures, including matrix overlays. Era 2 started in the 1980s and includes the designs that organize around horizontal processes, such as re-engineering. Era 3 came into its own in the 1990s when corporations embraced the hollow, modular and virtual organization forms that open the organization to outside sourcing partnerships. Design principles and examples of when to use each design are discussed.
{"title":"What is the Right Organization Design?","authors":"N. Anand, R. Daft","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.961013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.961013","url":null,"abstract":"This paper is a follow up to Robert Duncan's seminal article, \"What is the Right Organization Structure?\" published in Organization Dynamics in 1979. The purpose of this paper is to present key developments in organization structure and design since Duncan's article was published. The design developments are organized into three eras. Era 1was dominant until the late 1970s and included the use of traditional functional and divisional structures, including matrix overlays. Era 2 started in the 1980s and includes the designs that organize around horizontal processes, such as re-engineering. Era 3 came into its own in the 1990s when corporations embraced the hollow, modular and virtual organization forms that open the organization to outside sourcing partnerships. Design principles and examples of when to use each design are discussed.","PeriodicalId":128420,"journal":{"name":"ORG: Organizational Structural Designs (Topic)","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126090841","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：