ORGANIZATIONAL LONGEVITY AS THE INDICATOR OF STRATEGIC SUCCESS: A CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL DISCUSION

Year 2014, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 15 - 24, 01.12.2014

Esra Dil

Abstract

Even the dominant view in mainstream business literature is ‘firms/companies will survive if they perform above the average’, in the reality of the business world/ in the market long-lived organizations are very few in number. Besides there are studies (De Geus, 1999; Capital Online, 2010; ATO, 2005) which found that life time of the organizations/firms are decreasing. Therefore it is thought that performing above the average does not guarantee the organizational longevity. In other words, achieving on average is necessary condition but not sufficient condition for living-company. Based on this basic assumption this study aims to discuss ‘organizational longevity’ in strategic management discipline framework - as a strategic success indicator instead of ‘performance’ that popular concept of the literature-. Since the study looks to the firms’ long time performance in the context of sustainable competition advantage issue, strategic management field is chosen as theoretical frame of the study. The design of the study consists of two parts: i- conceptual part which focuses on the definition of organizational longevity and the linkage between the concept and strategic management, iitheoretical part which is concerning to discuss organizational longevity through the basic discussions and classifications of strategic management field. In consequence of the study put forward that, classical strategic management perspective and the basis paradigm of this thought dominate the mainstream literature by prioritizing the concept of ‘performance’. But it is possible to enlarge discussion areas of strategic management discipline by focusing organizational longevity which enable to research different contexts and different firm types

Keywords

-

STRATEJİK BAŞARI GÖSTERGESİ OLARAK ÖRGÜTSEL UZUN ÖMÜRLÜLÜK: KAVRAMSAL VE KURAMSAL BİR TARTIŞMA

Abstract

İşletme disiplini literatüründe hakim olan görüş, işletmelerin ortalamanın üzerinde performans sergilediklerinde hayatta kalacağı yönünde olsa da, gerçeklikte/piyasada uzun ömürlü işletmelerin sayısının oldukça az olduğu görülmektedir. Bununla birlikte işletmelerin/örgütlerin yaşam sürelerinin giderek kısalmakta olduğunu bulgulayan çalışmalar da mevcuttur (De Geus, 1999; Capital Online, 2010; ATO, 2005). Bu nedenle ortalamanın üzerinde performansın işletmenin uzun ömürlülüğünün teminatı -bir başka ifade ile performansın uzun ömürlülük için gerekli şart olduğu, ancak yeterli şart- olmadığı düşünülmektedir. Bu temel varsayımdan hareketle bu çalışma ‘örgütsel uzun ömürlülüğü’ bir başarı göstergesi olarak kabul edip, kavramı stratejik yönetim disiplini çerçevesinde tartışmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu kabul ile çalışma, başarı göstergesi olarak çoğunlukla ‘performans’ kavramının araştırıldığı literatürden farklılaşmaktadır. Rekabet avantajının nasıl oluşturulup, sürdürüleceği problematiği kapsamında, işletmelerin dünü, bugünü ve yarınını araştırmaya konu edildiğinden stratejik yönetim alanı bu çalışmanın kuramsal sınırlarını çizen çerçeve olarak seçilmiştir. Çalışmanın tasarımı iki seviyeden oluşmaktadır. Bunlardan ilki, örgütsel uzun ömürlülük kavramının tanımlanıp, literatürdeki araştırmalar yardımıyla stratejik yönetim disiplini ile ilişkisinin kurulduğu kavramsal kısımdır. İkincisi ise stratejik yönetim disiplini içinde var olan temel sınıflandırmalar üzerinden örgütsel uzun ömürlülüğün tartışıldığı kuramsal kısımdır. Çalışmanın sonucunda, ‘performans’ kavramını önceleyerek ana akım strateji yazınına yön veren kaynağın, klasik stratejik yönetim perspektifi ve bu perspektifin üzerinde yükseldiği paradigmanın anlaşılmıştır. Çeşitli stratejik yönetim perspektiflerinden beslenerek örgütsel uzun ömürlülük konusuna odaklanmanın, farklı bağlamlardaki farklı işletme tiplerinin strateji araştırmalarına imkan sağlayacağı ve böylece disiplinin tartışma alanlarını genişleteceği de çalışmanın sonuç niteliğindeki iddiasıdır.

Keywords

Örgütsel Uzun Ömürlülük, Stratejik Yönetim Perspektifleri

References

• Aile İşletmeleri Kongresi Kitabı, 2012, İstanbul.
• Akın, Gib. (2000). How Long Do Things Last? Journal Of Organizational Change Management. 13, 30-31.
• Alchıan, A. A. (1950). Uncertainty, Evolution, And Economic Theory. Journal Of Political Economy. 58.
• Ansoff, H. I. (1965). Corporate Strategy; An Analytic Approach To Business Policy For Growth And Expansion. New York, Mcgraw-Hill.
• Ansoff, H. I. (1991). Critique Of Henry Mintzberg's ‘The Design School: Reconsidering The Basic Premises Of Strategic Management’. Strategic Management Journal. 12, 449-461.
• ATO (2005), Http://Www.Atonet.Org.Tr/Yeni/İndex.Php?P=331&L=1
• Barca, M. (2003). Economic Foundations Of Strategic Management. Aldershot, Hants, England, Ashgate.
• Barnard, C. (1938) “The Functions Of The Executive”. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press.
• Baum, J.A.C Olıver, C. (1991). Institutional Linkages And Organizational Mortality. Administrative Science Quarterly. 36, 187-218.
• Beard, D. W., & Dess, G. G. (1981). Corporate-Level Strategy, Business-Level Strategy, And Firm Performance. The Academy Of Management Journal. 24, 663-688.
• Calorı, R. (1998). Essai: Philosophizing On Strategic Management Models.Organızatıon Studıes -Berlın- European Group For Organızatıonal Studıes-. 19, 281-306.
• Chaffee, E. (1985), “Three Models Od Strategy. Academy Of Management Rewiew,
• Vol. 10, No 1, S. 89–98.
• Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy And Structure: Chapters İn The History Of The İndustrial Enterprise. Cambridge, M.I.T. Press.
• Capital Online, 2010; www.capital.com.tr/Haberler/Detay.aspx?HaberID=19358
• Carroll, G. R. (1993). A Sociological View On Why Firms Differ. Strategic Management Journal. 14, 237-249.
• Carroll, G. R., & Delacroıx, J. (1982). Organizational Mortality İn The Newspaper Industries Of Argentina And Ireland: An Ecological Approach. Administrative Science Quarterly. 27, 169-198.
• Cefıs, E., & Marsılı, O. (2006). Survivor: The Role Of İnnovation İn Firms’ Survival.Research Policy. 35, 626- 641.
• Cıavarella, M. A., Buchholtz, A. K., Rıordan, C. M., Gatewood, R. D., & Stokes, G. S. (2004). The Big Five And Venture Survival: Is There A Linkage? Journal Of Business Venturing. 19, 465-483.
• Collins Ve Porras; 1999; Kalıcı Olmak, Sistem Yayıncılık.
• De Geus, Arie (1999) Yaşayan Şirket, Rota Rota Yayınları.
• De Wıtt, B. Ve R. Meyer (2004), Strategy: Process, Content, Context, Thomson, London. Ertürk Mümin İşletme Biliminin Temel İlkeleri 8.Baskı,Beta Freeman, J., Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (1983). The Liability Of Newness: Age Dependence İn Organizational Death Rates. American Sociological Review, 692-710.
• Gökçe Dinçer (2010), Http://Www.Hurriyet.Com.Tr/Ekonomi/15442663.Asp?Gid=37
• Granovetter, M. (1997). Economic Action And Social Structure: The Problem Of Embeddedness. Internatıonal Lıbrary Of Crıtıcal Wrıtıngs In Economıcs. 83, 142-171.
• Hafsı, T., & Thomas, H. (2005). Strategic Management And Change İn High Dependency Environments: The Case Of A Philanthropic Organization. Voluntas: International Journal Of Voluntary And Nonprofit Organizations. 16, 329-351.
• Hall, R. (1997). ‘Long Term Survivors’. Journal Of General Management, 4, 1-15.
• Harris, I. C., & Ruefli, T. W. (2000). The Strategy/Structure Debate: An Examination Of The Performance İmplications. Journal Of Management Studies,37(4), 587-604.
• Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1988). The Ecology Of Organizational Mortality: American Labor Unions, 1836- 1985. American Journal Of Sociology, 25-52.
• Henderson, B. D. (1989). The Origin Of Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 67(6), 139-143.
• Johnson, P., & Duberley, J. (2000). Understanding Management Research An İntroduction To Epistemology. London, Sage Publications.
• Katz, D., R.L. Kahn (1966). The Social Psychology Of Organizations. New York: Wiley.
• Kwee, Z. (2004). ‘Corporate Longevity: What Makes Eight Of The 200+-Year-Old Companies
• So Resilient?’ Msc. Thesis, Delft: Delft University Of Technology (Tu Delft) – Faculty Of
• Technology, Policy And Management
• Kwee, Z. (2009). Investigating Three Key Principles Of Sustained Strategic Renewal A Longitudinal Study Of Long-Lived Firms, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi.
• Krell, T. C. (2000). Organizational Longevity And Technological Change. Journal Of Organizational Change Management. 13, 8-14.
• Konz, G.N.P. And Katz, J.A. (1996). ‘Hyperlongevity İn Leadership Endeavors: Deep Structure
• And The Lessons Of Religious Orders For Very Long-Term Survival’. Journal Of Management Systems, 8, 51-60.
• Karalar Rıdvan (2005) Genel İşletme, Eskişehir.
• Lyles, M. A., Saxton, T., & Watson, K. (2004). Venture Survival İn A Transitional Economy. Journal Of Management. 30, 351-375.
• Meyer, M. W., & Zucker, L. G. (1989). Permanently Failing Organizations. Newbury Park, Ca: Sage Publications.
• Montuori, L. A. (2000). Organizational Longevity-Integrating Systems Thinking, Learning And Conceptual Complexity. Journal Of Organizational Change Management, 13(1), 61-73.
• Mayfıeld, M., Mayfıeld, J., & Stephens, D. (2007). The Relationship Of Generic Strategy Typing And Organizational Longevity: A Preliminary Analysis İn The Comic Book İndustry Using The Miles And Snow Typology. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal Incorporating Journal Of Global Competitiveness. 17, 94-108
• Markides, C. C., & Williamson, P. J. (1994). Related Diversification, Core Competences And Corporate Performance. Strategic Management Journal,15(S2), 149-165.
• Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns İn Strategy Formation. Management Science,24(9), 934-948.
• Mintzberg, H. (1987). The Strategy Concept 1: Five P's For Strategy. U. Of California.
• Mintzberg, H. (1990). Strategy Formation: Schools Of Thought. Perspectives On Strategic Management, 1968, 105-235.
• Mintzberg, H., & Ahlstrand, B. (84). En Lampel, J.(1998). Strategy Safari A Guided Tour Through The Wilds Of Strategic Management.
• ÖZ-Alp; ŞAn 1996 Genel İşletme T.C. Anadolu ÜNiversitesi.; T.C. Anadolu ÜNiversitesi. AçIkö Retim FaküLtesi Yayınları
• Pascale, R. T. (1990). Managing On The Edge: How The Smartest Companies Use Conflict To Stay Ahead. New York: Simon And Schuster.
• Pettigrew, A. M. (1977). Strategy Formulation As A Political Process.International Studies Of Management & Organization, 7(2), 78-87.
• Pettigrew, A. M. (1985). The Awakening Giant: Continuity And Change İn Imperial Chemical Industries. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Porter, M. E. (1979), The Structure Within Industries And Companies' Performance, Review Of Economics And Statistics (May): 214-227.
• Porter, Micheal E. (1980) (1998, 2nd Edition), Competitive Strategy, Techniques For Analysing Industries And Competitors, The Free Press, New York.
• Porter, Michael E. (1985), Competitive Advantage, New York: Free Press.
• Rice, A.K. (1963). The Enterprise And İts Environment. London: Tavistock.
• Snow, C. C., & Hrebiniak, L. G. (1980). Strategy, Distinctive Competence, And Organizational Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 317-336.
• Stadler, C. (2007). ‘The Four Principles Of Enduring Success’. Harvard Business Review, 85, 62- 72.
• Sloan, A. P. (1963). My Years With General Motors. Ed. By John Mcdonald With Catharine Stevens. Doubleday.
• Swedberg, R., Himmelstrand, U., & Brulin, G. (1987). The Paradigm Of Economic Sociology: Premises And Promises. Theory And Society, 16(2), 169-213.
• Volberda, H.W. (1998). Building The Flexible Firm: How To Remain Competitive. London:
• Oxford University Press.
• Montgomery, C. A., & Wernerfelt, B. (1988). Diversification, Ricardian Rents, And Tobin's Q. The Rand Journal Of Economics, 623-632.
• Whittington, R. (1993). What Is Strategy----And Does It Matter. Routhledge.
• Whitley, R. D. (1991). The Social Construction Of Business Systems İn East Asia. Organization Studies, 12(1), 1-28.
• Whittington, R. (1992). Putting Giddens İnto Action: Social Systems And Managerial Agency. Journal Of Management Studies, 29(6), 693-712.