Research Notes. ORGANIZATIONAL SIZE, TECHNOLOGY, AND STRUCTURE: REPLICATION OF STUDY OF SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES AMONG SMALL RETAIL FIRMS.

Funding source, board involvement techniques, and financial vulnerability in nonprofit organizations: A test of resource dependence

“…Board composition, for example, has been related to the use of diversification strategies (Tihanyi, Johnson, Hoskisson, and Hitt, 2003), performance after bankruptcy reorganization (Daily, 1995), financial performance (Judge, 1994), and the initiation of strategic change (Goodstein, Gautam, and Boeker, 1994), while organization size is related to financial performance and survival (Judge, 1994;Paulson, 1980). In addition, national affiliation for nonprofit organizations has been linked to specific performance mandates and structure (Callen, Klein, and Tinkelman, 2003;Cordes, Henig, Twombly, and Saunders, 1999;Siciliano, 1997).…”

“…United Way affiliation could have had a meaningful impact on how CEOs engage members of the board, and whereas the use of board involvement practices by the CEO was measured, no indication of HFUW influence was considered. That said, the current study is among several that have restricted its sample to agencies that are affiliated with the United Way (Cordes, Henig, Twombly, and Saunders, 1999;Gronbjerg, Harmon, Olkkonen, and Raza, 1996;Paulson, 1980;Stone, Hager, and Griffin, 2001). Examining HFUW organizations, each of which operated in the same locality, allowed us to isolate the impact of funding on performance and eliminate the possibility that historical or macroeconomic factors had an influence.…”

Just‐in‐time and context

“…Following this lead, we took a more direct approach in order to reduce respondent burden and asked what percentage of sales and purchases were made on JIT bases (α = 0.66). Production complexity was measured by the number of SKUs[46,47 ]. A natural logarithm was taken of production complexity and JIT selling and purchasing percentage for the same reason that size measures are log transformed.…”

The Relationship between Technology and Organizational Structures: Empirical Truth or Theoreticians' Wishful Thinking?

“…Many organizational structure and technology constructs were developed in the context of workunits, departments, or homogeneous systems (Comstock & Scott, 1977;Perrow, 1967;Reimann, 1980 (Paulson, 1980) to an average of 5150 employees in various manufacturing and service organizations (Hickson, Hinings, & McMillan, 1974), size may account for a significant amount of the variation in the strength of observed relationships between technology and dimensions of structure.…”