پژوهشی دربارة جهت‌گیری تأثیر ساختار سازمانی و راهبردهای رقابتی بر عملکرد سازمان (مورد مطالعه: شرکت‌های مهندسی مشاور)

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار دانشکدة اقتصاد و علوم اداری دانشگاه اصفهان، ‌اصفهان،‌ ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت بازرگانی (رفتار سازمانی و مدیریت منابع انسانی)، پردیس میرداماد دانشگاه اصفهان، ‌اصفهان،‌ ایران

3 کارشناس ارشد MBA گرایش استراتژی، پردیس کیش دانشگاه تهران، کیش،‌ ایران؛

چکیده

پژوهش حاضر با استفاده از الگویابی معادله­های ساختاری و با توجه به جهت‌گیری برهم‌کنش ساختار و راهبرد رقابتی شرکت‌های مهندسان مشاور، به­دنبال بررسی رابطة میان ساختار سازمانی، راهبردهای رقابتی و عملکرد سازمان است. این جهت‌گیری با توجه به نوع الگوی مورد نظر (اقتضایی یا مبتنی بر منبع) تعیین می‌شود. جامعة آماری پژوهش، شامل همة متخصصان شرکت‌های مهندسان مشاور در محدودة شهر تهران است. برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها، از روش حداقل مجذورات جزئی (PLS) استفاده شد. پس از جمع‌آوری پرسشنامه‌ها، داده‌ها از طریق نرم‌افزار VisualPLS تحلیل شد. یافته‌های آماری نشان می‌دهند که الگوی مبتنی بر منابع، برای بیان روابط بین متغیرهای ساختار، راهبرد رقابتی و عملکرد شرکت، از توان تبیین و توضیح بیشتری برخوردار است؛ بنابراین، می‌توان رویکردهای سنتی را که در آنها، ساختار سازمانی به‌عنوان یک متغیر جانبی و وابسته به راهبرد شرکت درنظر گرفته می‌شد، کمرنگ دانست و به‌جای آنها، دیدگاه جدید مبتنی بر منابع- که ساختار را به‌عنوان یک منبع مهم کسب مزیت رقابتی برای راهبردها درنظر می‌گیرد- در متن قرار داد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Direction of effect of competitive strategies and organizational structure on corporate performance (Case study: Engineering consultant firms)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hadi Teimori 1
  • Reza Abachian Ghasemi 2
  • Saeid Akbariani 2
  • Arghavan Taherkhanchi Tabrizi 3
1 Assistant Prof., Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Isfahan University, Isfahan, Iran
2 PhD. Candidate, Human Resource Management, Isfahan University Pardis, Isfahan, Iran
3 MBA in Strategy, Kish Pardis, University of Tehran, Kish, Iran
چکیده [English]

Using structural equation modeling, the current study aims to examine the relationship between organizational structure, competitive strategies and organizational performance with respect to the interaction between structure and competitive strategy in the engineering consulting firms. This orientation is determined with respect to the desired approach (contingency or resource based view). The study population included all engineering consulting firms in Tehran district. Partial least squares (PLS) was used for analysis of data. After collecting the questionnaires, the data were analyzed using VisualPLS software. The statistical findings indicate that the resource-based model has more explanation power to express relationships between structure, competitive strategy and firm performance. Therefore, the traditional approaches in which organizational structure is considered as a lateral variable and is dependent on corporate strategy can be regarded lass, instead the resource based view- in which the structure is considered as an important source of competitive advantage for strategies- can be placed in the context of our explanations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Competitive Strategies
  • consultant engineering firms
  • firm performance
  • Organizational structure

مراجع

Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 1(17): 99-120.
 
Beal, R. M. (2000). Competing effectively: Environmental scanning, competitive strategy and organizational performance in small manufacturing firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 1(38): 27-47.
 
Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge.
 
Chathoth, P. K. & Olsen, M. D. (2007). The effect of environment risk, corporate strategy and capital structure on firm performance: An empirical investigation of restaurant firms. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 3(26): 502-516.
 
Chin, W. W. (1998). Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly; 2(1): VII- XVI.
 
Chin, W., Marcolin, B & Newsted, P.A. (1996). Partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and voice mail emotion/adoption study. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Systems, Cleveland, Ohio; It’s online at: disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/icis96.pdf
 
Chmielewski, D. A. & Paladino, A. (2007). Driving a resource orientation: Reviewing the role of resource and capability characteristics. Management Decision, 3(45): 462-483.
 
Crook, T. R., Ketchen, D. J. Jr., Combs, J. G. & Todd, S.Y. (2008). Strategic resources and performance: A metaanalysis. Strategic Management Journal, 11(29): 1141-1154.
 
Cruz, S. & Camps, J. (2003). Organic vs mechanistic structures. Construction and validation of a scale of measurement. Management Research, 1(1): 111-123.
 
Donavan, D. T., Brown, T. J. & Mowen, J. C. (2004). Internal benefits of service-worker customer orientation: Job satisfaction, commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 1(68): 128-146.
 
Edelman, L. F. Brush, C. G. & Manolova, T. (2005). Co-alignment in the resource-performance relationship: Strategy as mediator. Journal of Business Venturing, 3(20): 359-83.
 
Enz, C. A. (2008). Creating a competitive advantage by building resource capability. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 1(49): 73-78.
 
Galan, J. I. & Sanchez-Bueno, M. J. (2009). The continuing validity of the strategy-structure nexus: New findings, 1993-2003. Strategic Management Journal, 11(30): 1234-1243.
 
Galetic, L. Prester, J. & Nacinovic, I. (2007). Organization as a source of competitive advantage: Case of Croatia. The Business Review, 1(7): 130-136.
 
Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 3(33): 114-134.
 
Hibbets, A. R. Albright, T. & Funk, W. (2003). The competitive environment and strategy of target costing implementers: Evidence from the field. Journal of Managerial Issues, 1(15): 65-81.
 
Hooman, H. A. (2007). Structural Equation Modelling Using LISREL. Samt Publications. Tehran. (In Persian)
 
Jogaratnam, G. & Tse, E. C. Y. (2004). The entrepreneurial approach to hotel operation: Evidence from the Asia-Pacific hotel industry. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 3(45): 248-259.
 
Jogaratnam, G. & Tse, E.C.Y. (2006). Entrepreneurial orientation and the structuring of organizations: Performance evidence from the Asian hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 6(18): 454-468.
 
Jonsson, C. & Devonish, D. (2009). An exploratory study of competitive strategies among hotels in a small developing Caribbean state, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 4(21): 491-500.
 
Kordnaeij, A., Moghimi, M., Ghanati, S. & Yazdani, H. R. (2009). Investigation on the relationship between organizational structure and entrepreneurship culture in Tehran University. Journal of Public Administration, 3(1):
119-134.
 
Law, R. & Jogaratnam, G. (2005). A study of hotel information technology applications. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 2(17): 170-180.
 
Ljungquist, U. (2007). Core competency beyond identification: Presentation of a model. Management Decision, 3(45): 393-402.
 
Miller, D. (1987). Strategy making and structure: Analysis and implications for performance. Academy of Management Journal, 1(30): 7-32.
 
Miller, D. (1988). Relating Porter’s business strategies to environment and structure: Analysis and performance implications. Academy of Management Journal, 2(31): 280-308.
 
Okumus, F. (2003). A framework to implement strategies in organizations. Management Decision, 9(41): 871-882.
 
Olsen, M. D. West, J. & Tse, E. C. Y. (2008). Strategic management in the hospitality industry, 3rd ed. Prentice Hall. New York.
 
Palmer, I. & Dunford, R. (2002). Out with the old and in with the new? The relationship between traditional and new organizational practices. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(10): 209-225.
 
Pelham, A. M. & Wilson, D. T. (1996). A longitudinal study of the impact of market structure, firm structure, strategy, and market orientation culture on dimensions of small-firm performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1(24): 27-43.
 
Rumelt, R. P. (1974). Strategy, structure and economic performance, Harvard University Press, Boston.
 
Sainaghi, R. (2010). Hotel performance: State of the art. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 7(22): 920-952.
 
Sharma, A. & Upneja, A. (2005). Factors influencing financial performance of small hotels in Tanzania. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 6/7(17): 504-515.
 
Sheehan, N. T. & Foss, N. J. (2007). Enhancing the prescriptiveness of the resource-based view through Porterian activity analysis. Management Decision, 3(45): 450-461.
 
Souitaris, V. (2001). Strategic influences of technological innovation in Greece. British Journal of Management, 2(12): 131-147.
 
Spanos, Y. E. & Lioukas, S. (2001). An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: Contrasting Porter’s competitive strategy framework and the resource-based perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 10(22): 907-934.
 
Suzuki, Y. (1980). The strategy and structure of top 100 Japanese industrial enterprises 1950-1970. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 1 No. 3,
pp. 265-91.
 
Teece, D. J. Pisano, G. & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 7(18): 509-533.
 
Tushman, M. L. (1979). Work characteristics and subunit communication structure: A contingency analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1(24): 82-98.

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار