We examine how the complementarity of control formalization and control flexibility influences organizational performance across contexts of varying competitive turbulence. We build contingency arguments anchored in the efficiency logic of control theory and investigate both the restrictive and facilitative views of control formalization. Our empirical evidence is based on a survey of top executives from 536 organizations across the United States, Australia, China, and Israel. We find that control formalization and control flexibility are complementary in environments of low competitive turbulence. With increasing turbulence, the complementarity diminishes and shifts toward substitutive effects.
AdlerPSGoldoftasBLevineDI (1999) Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science10: 43–68.
2.
AdlerSPBorysB (1996) Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly41: 61–89.
3.
AhrensTChapmanCS (2004) Accounting for flexibility and efficiency: A field study of management control systems in a restaurant chain. Contemporary Accounting Research21: 271–301.
4.
AikenLSWestSGRenoRR (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. New York: SAGE.
5.
AikenMBacharachSBFrenchJL (1980) Organizational structure, work process, and proposal making in administrative bureaucracies. Academy of Management Journal23: 631–652.
6.
AndersonJCGerbingDW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin103: 411–423.
7.
ArmstrongJSOvertonTS (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research14: 396–402.
8.
Atuahene-GimaKLiH (2002) When does trust matter? Antecedents and contingent effects of supervisee trust on performance in selling new products in China and the United States. Journal of Marketing66: 61–81.
9.
BagozziRPhillipsL (1982) Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. Administrative Science Quarterly27: 459–489.
10.
BascleG (2008) Controlling for endogeneity with instrumental variables in strategic management research. Strategic Organization6: 285–327.
11.
BloomNBrynjolfssonEPatnaikM, et al. (2017) The importance of structured management practices. MIT Sloan Management Review. Available at: https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-importance-of-structured-management-practices/#:~:text=Management%20styles%20and%20practices%20vary, companies%2C%20and%20even%20business%20units.&text=In%20fact%2C%20the%20research%20shows,as%20well%20as%20higher%20
12.
BrislinRW (1970) Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology1: 185–216.
13.
BrownSLEisenhardtKM (1997) The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly42: 1–34.
14.
BurnsTEStalkerGM (1961) The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
15.
CardinalLB (2001) Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The use of organizational control in managing research and development. Organization Science12: 19–36.
16.
CardinalLBKreutzerMFMillerCC (2017) An aspirational view of organizational control research: Re-invigorating empirical work to better meet the challenges of 21st century organizations. Academy of Management Annals11: 559–592.
17.
CertoSTBusenbarkJRWooHS, et al. (2016) Sample selection bias and Heckman models in strategic management research. Strategic Management Journal37: 2639–2657.
18.
ChenDParkSHNewburryW (2009) Parent contribution and organizational control in international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal30: 1133–1156.
19.
CheungWJJacksonAB (2013) Chief Executive Officer departures and market uncertainty. Australian Journal of Management38: 279–310.
20.
ChoudhuryVSabherwalR (2003) Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects. Information Systems Research14: 291–314.
21.
DamanpourF (2010) An integration of research findings of effects of firm size and market competition on product and process innovations. British Journal of Management21: 996–1010.
22.
D’AveniRA (1994) Hypercompetition: Managing the Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering. New York: Free Press.
23.
DavisJPEisenhardtKMBinghamCB (2009) Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Administrative Science Quarterly54: 413–452.
24.
DawsonJFRichterAW (2006) Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: Development and application of a slope difference test. Journal of Applied Psychology91: 917–926.
25.
DeSarboWSAnthonyDiBenedettoCSongM, et al. (2005) Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: Uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal26: 47–74.
26.
DozYLKosonenM (2010) Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Planning43: 370–382.
27.
EisenhardtKM (1985) Control: Organizational and economic approaches. Management Science31: 134–149.
28.
EisenhardtKMSullDN (2001) Strategy as simple rules. Harvard Business Review79: 106–116.
29.
EisenhardtKMFurrNRBinghamCB (2010) Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science21: 1263–1273.
30.
FarjounM (2010) Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review35: 202–225.
31.
FiolMO’ConnorE (2017) Unlearning established organizational routines: Part I. The Learning Organization24: 13–29.
32.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18: 39–50.
GlissonCMartinP (1980) Productivity and efficiency in human service organizations as related to structure, size and age. Academy of Management Journal23: 21–38.
36.
GopalAGosainS (2009) The role of organizational controls and boundary spanning in software development outsourcing: Implications for project performance. Information Systems Research21: 1–23.
37.
HarriganKR (1983) Research methodologies for contingency approaches to business strategy. Academy of Management Review8: 398–405.
38.
HoskissonREEdenLLauCM, et al. (2000) Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal43: 249–267.
39.
HuangMCChengHLTsengCY (2014) Reexamining the direct and interactive effects of governance mechanisms upon buyer–supplier cooperative performance. Industrial Marketing Management43: 704–716.
40.
HuberGPO’ConnellMJCummingsLL (1975) Perceived environmental uncertainty: Effects of information and structure. Academy of Management Journal18: 725–740.
41.
JordanPJTrothAC (2020) Common method bias in applied settings: The dilemma of researching in organizations. Australian Journal of Management45: 3–14.
42.
Kovoor-MisraSSmithMA (2008) In the aftermath of an acquisition triggers and effects on perceived organizational identity. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science44: 422–444.
43.
KreutzerMFWalterJCardinalLB (2015) Organizational control as antidote to politics in the pursuit of strategic initiative performance. Strategic Management Journal36: 1317–1337.
44.
KreutzerMFWalterJCardinalLB, et al. (2016) Formal and informal control as complement or substitute? The role of the task environment. Strategy Science1: 235–255.
45.
KumarNSternLWAndersonJC (1993) Conducting interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal36: 1633–1651.
46.
KurkeLB (1988) Does adaptation preclude adaptability? Strategy and performance. In: ZuckerLG (ed.) Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.pp 199–222.
47.
LiHZhangY (2007) The role of managers political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China’s transition economy. Strategic Management Journal28: 791–804.
48.
LongCPBenderskyCMorrillC (2011) Fairness monitoring: Linking managerial controls and fairness judgments in organizations. Academy of Management Journal54: 1045–1068.
49.
NadkarniSHerrmannP (2010) CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal53: 1050–1073.
50.
NadkarniSNarayananVK (2007) Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management Journal28: 243–270.
51.
NadkarniSChenTChenJ (2016) The clock is ticking! Executive temporal depth, industry velocity, and competitive aggressiveness. Strategic Management Journal37: 1132–1153.
52.
NavehE (2007) Formality and discretion in successful R&D projects. Journal of Operations Management25: 110–125.
53.
NunnallyJ (1978) Psychometric Methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
54.
OcasioW (1997) Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal18: 187–206.
55.
OuchiWG (1980) Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly25: 129–141.
56.
PatelPC (2011) Role of manufacturing flexibility in managing duality of formalization and environmental uncertainty in emerging firms. Journal of Operations Management29: 143–162.
57.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJ-Y, et al. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88: 879–903.
58.
PoppoLZengerT (2002) Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements?Strategic Management Journal23: 707–725.
59.
RepenningNPKiefferDRepenningJ (2018) A new approach to designing work. MIT Sloan Management Review59: 29–38.
60.
Rueda-ManzanaresAAragon-CorreaJASharmaS (2008) The influence of stakeholders on the environmental strategy of service firms: The moderating effects of complexity, uncertainty and munificence. British Journal of Management19: 185–203.
61.
RustagiSKingWRKirschLJ (2008) Predictors of formal control usage in IT outsourcing partnerships. Information Systems Research19: 126–143.
62.
SeeckHKantolaA (2009) Organizational control: Restrictive or productive?Journal of Management and Organization15: 241–257.
63.
ShinkleGAYangMMYangF, et al. (2021) Enacting formal controls in information system development: Process guidance and goal importance. Information & Management58: 103430.
64.
SiggelkowNRivkinJW (2005) Speed and search: Designing organizations for turbulence and complexity. Organization Science16: 101–122.
65.
SihagVRijsdijkSA (2019) Organizational controls and performance outcomes: A meta-analytic assessment and extension. Journal of Management Studies56: 91–133.
66.
SineDWMitsuhashiHKirschAD (2006) Revisiting Burns and Stalker: Formal structure and new venture performance in emerging economic sectors. Academy of Management Journal49: 121–132.
67.
SitkinSBCardinalLBBijlsma-FrankemaK (2010) Organizational Control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
68.
SmithWKBesharovML (2019) Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly64: 1–44.
69.
SteenkampJEVan TrijpHC (1991) The use of LISREL in validating marketing constructs. International Journal of Research in Marketing8: 283–299.
70.
TatikondaVMRosenthalRS (2000) Successful execution of product development projects: Balancing firmness and flexibility in the innovation process. Journal of Operations Management18: 401–425.
71.
TeeceDPeterafMLeihS (2016) Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review58: 13–35.
72.
TurnerKLMakhijaMV (2006) The role of organizational controls in managing knowledge. Academy of Management Review31: 197–217.
73.
WallySBaumJR (1994) Personal and structural determinants of the pace of strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal37: 932–956.
74.
WalterJKreutzerMKreutzerK (2021) Setting the tone for the team: A multi-level analysis of managerial control, peer control, and their consequences for job satisfaction and team performance. Journal of Management Studies58: 849–878.
75.
WangTYangJZhangF (2021) The effects of organizational controls on innovation modes: An ambidexterity perspective. Journal of Management & Organization27: 106–130.
76.
WienerMMähringMRemusU, et al. (2016) Control configuration and control enactment in information systems projects: Review and expanded theoretical framework. MIS Quarterly40: 741–774.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
