The diffusion of organizational practice: Institutional factors affecting the adoption of self-managed work teams

International Review of Public Administration

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 93-103

  Yang, Seung Bum ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Institutions; Self managed work teams; Team based management

Indexed keywords

EID: 45749094633     PISSN: 12294659     EISSN: 2331795     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/12294659.2007.10805094     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abrahamson, Eric. 1991. Managerial fads and fashions: The diffusion and rejection of innovations. Academy of Management Review 16, 3: 586-612.
2. Ammons, David N. 1999. A proper mentality for benchmarking. Public Administration Review 59, 2: 105-109.
3. Armour, Henry Ogden, and David J. Teece. 1978. Organizational structure and economic performance: A test of the multidivisional hypothesis. The Bell Journal of Economics 9, 1: 106-122.
4. Berry, Frances Stokes, and William D. Berry. 1990. State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis. American Political Science Review 84, 2: 395-415.
5. Bowers, Raymond V. 1938. Differential intensity of intra-societal diffusion. American Sociological Review 3, 1: 21-31.
6. Carlson, Richard O. 1965. Adoption of educational innovations. Eugene, OR: Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon.
7. D'Aunno, Thomas, Melissa Succi, and Jeffrey A. Alexander. 2000. The role of institutional and market forces in divergent organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly 45, 4: 679-703.
8. Delmas, Magali A., and Michael W. Toffel. 2005. Institutional pressure and environmental management practices. Center for Responsible Business. Working Paper Series. Paper 32. University of California, Santa Barbara.
9. DiMaggio, Paul J., and Walter W. Powell. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48, 2: 147-160.
10. Eden, Lorraine, and Stewart R. Miller. 2004. Distance matters: Liability of foreignness, institutional distance and ownership strategy. In Advances in International Management (volume 16: Theories of the multinational enterprise: Diversity, complexity and relevance), M Hitt and J Cheng, (Eds.). pp. 187-221. Elsevier, New York.
11. Frederickson, H. George, Gary Alan Johnson, and Curtis Wood. 2004. The changing structure of American cities: A study of the diffusion of innovation. Public Administration Review 64, 3: 320-330.
12. Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology 78, 6: 1360-1380.
13. Guler, Isin, Mauro F. Guillen, and John Muir Macpherson. 2002. Global competition, institutions, and the diffusion of organizational practices: The international spread of ISO 9000 quality certificates. Administrative Science Quarterly 47, 2: 207-232.
14. Guy, Mary E. 2003. Ties that bind: The link between public administration and political science. Journal of Politics 65, 3: 641-655.
15. Holpp, Lawrence. 1992. Making choices: Self-directed teams or total quality management?. Training 29, 5: 69-76.
16. International City/County Management Association. 1999. Council-manager form of government: Answers to your questions. Washington DC: Author.
17. Kostova, Tatiana. 1999. Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review 24, 2: 308-324.
18. Kostova, Tatiana, and Kendall Roth. 2002. Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal 45, 1: 215-233.
19. Kraatz, Matthew S. 1998. Learning by association? Interorganizational networks and adaptation to environmental change. Academy of Management Journal 41, 6: 621-643.
20. Lewis, Dianne. 1996. The organizational culture saga-from OD to TQM: a critical review of the literature. Part 1-concepts and early trends. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 17, 1: 12-19.
21. North, Douglass. 1990. Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Rainey, Hal G. 1996. Building an effective organizational culture. In Handbook of public administration, J. Perry (Ed.). pp. 151-166. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23. Rao, Hayagreeva. 1994. The social construction of reputation: Certification contests, legitimation, and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry: 1895-1912. Strategic Management Journal 15, Special issue (Winter): 29-44.
24. Rogers, Everett M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press.
25. Rogers, Evelyn F., William Metlay, Ira T. Kaplan, and Terri Shapiro. 1995. Self-managing work teams: Do they really work? Human Resource Planning 18, 2: 53-57.
26. Schein, Edgar H. 1992. Organizational culture and leadership. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Scott, W. Richard. 2001. Institutions and organizations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Sexton, Carol. 1994. Self-managed work teams: TQM technology at the employee level. Journal of Organizational Change Management 7, 2: 45-52.
29. Sherman, Betsy. 1989. The role of ICMA in innovation diffusion. Public Management 71, 5: 9-10.
30. Spreitzer, Gretchen M., Susan G. Cohen, and Gerald E. Ledford, Jr. 1999. Developing effective selfmanaging work teams in service organizations. Group & Organization Management 24, 3: 340-366.
31. Szulanski, Gabriel. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17, Special Issue (Winter): 27-43.
32. Teece, David J. 1981. Internal organization and economic performance: An empirical analysis of the profitability of principal firms. The Journal of Industrial Economics 30, 2: 173-199.
33. Williamson, Oliver E. 1970. Corporate control and business behavior: An inquiry into the effects of organization form on enterprise behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
34. Yang, Seung-Bum, and Mary E. Guy. 2004. Selfmanaged work teams: Who uses them? What makes them successful?. Public Performance & Management Review 27, 3: 61-80.