ナドラー＝タッシュマンの整合性モデルの修正
組織の両利きのために
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51094/jxiv.498キーワード:
組織の両利き、 組織アイデンティティ、 三項関係、 ナドラー＝タッシュマンの整合性モデル、 多元的ロジック抄録
組織変革に関してよく知られた有用なモデルに、ナドラー＝タッシュマンの整合性モデル（Nadler-Tushman congruence model）がある（Nadler & Tushman, 1989; 1997）。しかし、30年以上も前に提唱されたため、最近の企業の関心事、たとえば、両利きの経営を実現しうるような組織変革を成功させるにはどうしたらよいかという問題意識に十分対応できていない懸念がある。本稿で注目した改善点は次の2点である：(1)組織内に存在する多元的で、ときに相反するロジックや各ロジックに関係する組織アイデンティティのマネジメントを説明できていない、(2)組織変革の実現に必要な整合性に到達しうるまでの具体的なプロセスがブラックボックスなままである。そこで、本稿ではその2点を改善した新たなモデルの考案・提示を試みた。
利益相反に関する開示
本論文に関する開示すべき利益相反はありません。ダウンロード *前日までの集計結果を表示します
引用文献
Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. (1985). Organizational identity. Research in Organizational behavior, 7, 263-295.
Amis, J. M. (2017). Understanding organization change and innovation: A Conversation with Mike Tushman. Journal of Change Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2017.1378697.
Ando, F. (2021). The influence of individual and organizational ambidexterity on their interpretations of the workplace. Annals of Business Administrative Science, 20, 155-168. https://doi.org/10.7880/abas.0210830a.
Ando, F., & Ueno, M. (2013). Ryokiki no keiei wo kano ni suru soshiki gakusyu mekanizumu [Organizational learning mechanism that enable ambidextrous management]. Akamon Manegimento Revhu [Akamon Management Review], 12(6), 429-456 (in Japanese).
Ando, F., Asai, H., Ito, H., Sugihara, K., & Ura, N. (2017). Soshiki henkaku no lebaleggi: Konnan ga choyaku ni kawaru mekanizumu [Leverage for organizational change: Mechanism for switching difficulty to quantum leap]. Hakuto Shobo (in Japanese).
Battilana, J., Sengul, M., Pache, A.-C., & Model, J. (2015). Harnessing productive tensions in hybrid organizations: The case of work integration social enterprises. Academy of Management Journal, 58(6), 1658-1685. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0903.
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014). Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 364-381. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.0431.
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522-537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2202135.
Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 517-554. https://doi.org/10.5465/256405.
Fang, C., Lee, J., & Schilling, M. A. (2010). Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design; The isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organization Science, 21(3), 625-642. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0468.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803-813. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4279103.
Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. (2012). Meta-organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 571-586. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1975.
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2002). The dynamics of organizational identity. Human Relations, 55(8), 989-1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726702055008181.
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078.
Kim, S. (2022). Strategic orientation, innovation, and the effects of entrepreneurial support mechanism in SMEs in South Korea: An application of subject-mechanism-performance congruence model. Asia Pacific Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2022.2134966.
Kuwashima, K., Inamizu, N., & Takahashi, N. (2020). In search of ambidexterity: Exploration and bricolage. Annals of Business Administrative Science, 19, 127-142. https://doi.org/10.7880/abas.0200621a.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard University Press.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71.
Nadler, D. A. & Tushman, M. L. (1989). Organizational frame bending: Principles for managing reorientation. Academy of Management Perspectives, 3(3), 194-204. https://doi.org10.5465/ame.1989.4274738.
Nadler, D. A. & Tushman, M. L. (1997). Competing by design: The power of organizational architecture. Oxford University Press.
O’Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2016). Lead and disrupt: How to solve the innovator’s dilemma. Stanford Business Books.
Raisch, S., & Tushman, M. L. (2016). Growing new corporate businesses: From initiation to graduation. Organization Science, 27(5), 1237-1257. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2016.1081.
Reed, G. W., Tushman, M. L., & Kapadia, S. R. (2018). Operational efficiency and effective management in the catheterization laboratory: JACC review topic of the week. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 72(20), 2507-2517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.2179.
Russo, M. V., & Harrison, N. S. (2005). Organizational design and environmental performance: Clues from the electronics industry. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 582-593. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.17843939.
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1977). Who get power－And how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power. Organizational Dynamics, Winter, 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(77)90028-6.
Sato, H. (2014). How to choose an appropriate dress?: An influence of change in organizational identity. Annals of Business Administrative Science, 13, 141-151. https://doi.org/10.7880/abas.13.141.
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223.
Yamaoka, T. (2015). Henkaku to paladokkusu no soshikiron [Change and paradox in organizations]. Chuokeizai sha (in Japanese).
Yamashiro, Y. (2015). Conceptual expansion into organizational identity change. Annals of Business Administrative Science, 14, 193-203. https://doi.org/10.7880/abas.14.193.
ダウンロード
公開済
投稿日時: 2023-09-04 00:07:05 UTC
公開日時: 2023-09-05 23:25:14 UTC
ライセンス
Copyright（c）2023
安藤, 史江
この作品は、Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licenseの下でライセンスされています。
