Organizational analysis of building projects

The principles of organization theory are applied to the organization of construction projects. This is done by proposing a framework for modelling the whole process of building procurement. This consists of a framework for describing the environments within which construction projects take place. This is followed by the development of a series of hypotheses about the organizational structure of construction projects. Four case studies are undertaken, and the extent to which their organizational structure matches the model is compared to the level of success achieved by each project. To this end there is a systematic method for evaluating the success of building project organizations, because any conclusions about the adequacy of a particular organization must be related to the degree of success achieved by that organization. In order to test these hypotheses, a mapping technique is developed. The technique offered is a development of a technique known as Linear Responsibility Analysis, and is called "3R analysis" as it deals with roles, responsibilities and relationships. The analysis of the case studies shows that they tended to suffer due to inappropriate organizational structure. One of the prevailing problems of public sector organization is that organizational structures are inadequately defined, and too cumbersome to respond to environmental demands on the project. The projects tended to be organized as rigid hierarchies, particularly at decision points, when what was required was a more flexible, dynamic and responsive organization. The study concludes with a series of recommendations; including suggestions for increasing the responsiveness of construction project organizations, and reducing the lead-in times for the inception periods.

Multilevel research in the field of organizational behavior: an empirical look at 10 years of theory and research

During the last 30 years, significant debate has taken place regarding multilevel research. However, the extent to which multilevel research is overtly practiced remains to be examined. This article analyzes 10 years of organizational research within a multilevel framework (from 2001 to 2011). The goals of this article are (a) to understand what has been done, during this decade, in the field of organizational multilevel research and (b) to suggest new arenas of research for the next decade. A total of 132 articles were selected for analysis through ISI Web of Knowledge. Through a broad-based literature review, results suggest that there is equilibrium between the amount of empirical and conceptual papers regarding multilevel research, with most studies addressing the cross-level dynamics between teams and individuals. In addition, this study also found that the time still has little presence in organizational multilevel research. Implications, limitations, and future directions are addressed in the end. Organizations are made of interacting layers. That is, between layers (such as divisions, departments, teams, and individuals) there is often some degree of interdependence that leads to bottom-up and top-down influence mechanisms. Teams and organizations are contexts for the development of individual cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors (top-down effects; Kozlowski & Klein, 2000). Conversely, individual cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors can also influence the functioning and outcomes of teams and organizations (bottom-up effects; Arrow, McGrath, & Berdahl, 2000). One example is when the rewards system of one organization may influence employees’ intention to quit and the existence or absence of extra role behaviors. At the same time, many studies have showed the importance of bottom-up emergent processes that yield higher level phenomena (Bashshur, Hernández, & González-Romá, 2011; Katz-Navon & Erez, 2005; Marques-Quinteiro, Curral, Passos, & Lewis, in press). For example, the affectivity of individual employees may influence their team’s interactions and outcomes (Costa, Passos, & Bakker, 2012). Several authors agree that organizations must be understood as multilevel systems, meaning that adopting a multilevel perspective is fundamental to understand real-world phenomena (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000). However, whether this agreement is reflected in practicing multilevel research seems to be less clear. In fact, how much is known about the quantity and quality of multilevel research done in the last decade? The aim of this study is to compare what has been proposed theoretically, concerning the importance of multilevel research, with what has really been empirically studied and published. First, this article outlines a review of the multilevel theory, followed by what has been theoretically “put forward” by researchers. Second, this article presents what has really been “practiced” based on the results of a review of multilevel studies published from 2001 to 2011 in business and management journals. Finally, some barriers and challenges to true multilevel research are suggested. This study contributes to multilevel research as it describes the last 10 years of research. It quantitatively depicts the type of articles being written, and where we can find the majority of the publications on empirical and conceptual work related to multilevel thinking.

Revisiting the 'modern' multinational enterprise theory: an emerging-market multinational perspective

Using Triad-based multinational enterprises as their empirical setting, influential scholars in international management uncovered key organizational characteristics needed to create globally integrated and locally responsive multinationals. They proposed a “modern” theory of multinationals' organization (Hedlund, 1994). But recently, a new generation of multinationals from emerging markets has appeared. Little is known about their organizational choices and some scholars even doubt that they leverage organizational capabilities altogether. Does the “modern” theory still hold in their case? This exploratory study of three emerging-market multinationals (EMNEs) discloses that for reasons related to their origin in emerging economies and to the competitive specificities of these economies, EMNEs approach the global and local conundrum in ways which are both similar – and vastly different – from recommendations of the “modern” theory. We inductively develop a new theory that accounts for the evolution of organizational capabilities in EMNEs to reconcile global integration and local responsiveness. We discuss its implications for the executives of both emerging and Triad-based multinationals.

Metabolic theory predicts whole-ecosystem properties

Understanding the effects of individual organisms on material cycles and energy fluxes within ecosystems is central to predicting the impacts of human-caused changes on climate, land use, and biodiversity. Here we present a theory that integrates metabolic (organism-based bottom-up) and systems (ecosystem-based top-down) approaches to characterize how the metabolism of individuals affects the flows and stores of materials and energy in ecosystems. The theory predicts how the average residence time of carbon molecules, total system throughflow (TST), and amount of recycling vary with the body size and temperature of the organisms and with trophic organization. We evaluate the theory by comparing theoretical predictions with outputs of numerical models designed to simulate diverse ecosystem types and with empirical data for real ecosystems. Although residence times within different ecosystems vary by orders of magnitude—from weeks in warm pelagic oceans with minute phytoplankton producers to centuries in cold forests with large tree producers—as predicted, all ecosystems fall along a single line: residence time increases linearly with slope = 1.0 with the ratio of whole-ecosystem biomass to primary productivity (B/P). TST was affected predominantly by primary productivity and recycling by the transfer of energy from microbial decomposers to animal consumers. The theory provides a robust basis for estimating the flux and storage of energy, carbon, and other materials in terrestrial, marine, and freshwater ecosystems and for quantifying the roles of different kinds of organisms and environments at scales from local ecosystems to the biosphere.