+
Chapter Five: Interorganizational
Relationships
Jennifer Lee-Plevnik and Krystle Vlasman
+
Overview of the Chapter

Organizational Ecosystems

Interorganizational Framework

Resource Dependence

Collaborative Networks

Population Ecology

Institutionalism
+
Organizational Ecosystems

Interorganizational Relationships – the relatively enduring
resource transactions, flows, and linkages that occur among
two or more organizations

Organizational Ecosystem – a system formed by the
interaction of a community of organizations and their
environment
+
Microsoft’s Organizational
Ecosystem
Information
Communications
Personal
Computers
Consumer
Electronics
Microsoft
+
Is Competition Dead?

Traditional Competition – a distinct company is competing
for survival and supremacy with other stand-alone
businesses

Coevolution - the evolution of two or more species that
interact closely with one another, with each species adapting
to changes in the other1

1
Wolves and caribou
www.thefreedictionary.com
+
The Changing Role of
Management

Think about horizontal processes rather than vertical
structures

Suppliers and customers are now becoming a part of the
team through horizontal linkages

Use coevolution to work with them
+
Interorganizational Framework

Helps managers switch from top down to horizontal
management

Characterization:


Whether the organizations are similar or dissimilar

Whether the relationships are competitive or cooperative
Managers can study their environment and adopt strategies
to suit their needs
+
Interorganizational Framework
Organizational Relationship
Organization Type
Dissimilar
Similar
Competitive
Resource
Dependence
Population Ecology
Cooperative
Collaborative
Network
Institutionalism
+
1. Resource Dependence

Traditional view of relationships

Try to minimize their dependence on other organizations

Amount of dependence is based on two factors:

Importance of the resource

Monopoly power
+
Resource Strategies

Alter the interdependent relationships

Interlocking directorships

Join trade associations

Sign trade agreements

Merge with another firm

Take political action
+
Power Strategies

Large, independent companies have power over small
suppliers

Ask suppliers to absorb more costs

Ship more efficiently

Provide more services
+
2. Collaborative Networks

Traditional:


Organizations work alone, believe in individualism and selfreliance
Collaborative network:

Companies join together to become more competitive and to
share scarce resources
+
Indigo.ca

Bricks-and-mortar

Bought Coles and Chapters

Partnership with Blue Nile and iUniverse

Created a virtual ecosystem
+
Why Collaboration?

Sharing risks when entering new markets

Reducing costs of expensive new programs

Enhancing organizational profile

Competition can be fierce in some areas while they are
cooperating in others


Like competing with a sibling
Encourages long term investment
+
From Adversaries to Partners
Traditional: Adversarial
* Low dependence
* Suspicion, competition, arms length
* Detailed performance measures,
closely monitored
* Price, efficacy, own profits
* Limited information and feedback
* Legal resolution of conflict
* Minimal Involvement and up-front
investment, separate resources
* Short-term contracts
* Contract limiting the relationship
New: Partnership
* High dependence
* Trust, value added to both sides,
high commitment
* Loose performance measures,
problems discussed
* Equity, fair dealing, both profit
* Electronic linkages to share
information, problem feedback, and
discussion
* Mechanisms for close coordination,
people on-site
* Involvement in partner’s product
design and production, shared
resources
* Long-term contracts
* Business assistance beyond the
contract
+
Example: Bombardier

Building a business jet with organizations from all over the
world

Rely heavily on suppliers for design support and shared
development costs and market risks

30 different suppliers

500 design members (250 are from outside suppliers)

$250 million invested by Bombardier
+
3. Population-Ecology Perspective

Population-Ecology Perspective


focuses on organizational diversity and adaptation within a
population of organizations
Population

a set of organizations engaged in similar activities with similar
patterns of resources utilization and outcomes
+
Why do New Organizations Form?

Adaptation of older organizations limited

New organizations bring innovation and change

Established organizations become antiquated

New organizations form that “fit” the environment
+
Limitations of Organizational
Change

Hannan and Freeman said organizations don’t change
because:

Heavy Investment in:

Plants

Equipment

Specialized Personnel

Limited Information

Established POV of Decision Makers

Historical Organizational Success

Difficulty changing organizational culture
+
Organizational Form and Niche

Organizational form: organization’s specific technology,
structure, products, goals, and personnel, which can be
selected or rejected by the environment

Niche: domain of unique environmental resources and needs
+
Elements in the PopulationEcology Model of Organizations
Variation
Selection
Retention
Large number
of variations
appear in the
population of
organizations
Some
organizations
find a niche
and survive
A few
organizations grow
large and become
institutionalized in
the environment
+
Population Ecology Model

Assumption: new organizations are always appearing in the
population

Population change defined by 3 principals:

Variation: appearance of new, diverse forms in a population of
organizations

Selection: whether a new organizational form is suited to the
environment and can survive

Retention: preservation and institutionalization of selected
organizational forms
+
Strategies for Survival

Struggle for existence: organizations are engaged in a
competitive struggle over resources, and each organizational
form is fighting to survive

Birth/survival of new organizational are based on several
factors:

Urban area

% of immigrants

Political turbulence

Industry growth rate

Environmental variability
+
Strategies for Survival
Generalists vs. Specialists Strategy

Generalists: organizations with a wide niche or domain, that
is, those that offer a broad range of products or services or
that serve a broad market

Specialists: organizations that provide a narrower range of
goods or services or that serve a narrower market
+
4. Institutionalism

Institutional Perspective: organizations survive and succeed
through congruence between an organization and the
expectations from its environment

Institutional Environment: composed from norms and values
from stakeholders

Legitimacy: organization's actions are desirable, proper, and
appropriate within the environment’s system of norms,
values, and beliefs

Argues organizations need legitimacy from their customers
+
Institutional View and
Organizational Design

Organizations have 2 essential dimensions:

Technical Dimension: governed by norms of rationality and
efficiency

Institutional Dimension: governed by expectations from external
environment
+
Institutional Similarity

Institutional Similarity (or Institutional Isomorphism) is the
emergence of a common structure and approach among
organizations in the same field

Three core mechanisms:

1. Mimetic Forces: pressure to copy or model other
organizations

Explains why fads occur in business world
+
Institutional Similarity

2. Coercive Forces: external pressures exerted on an
organization to adopt structures, techniques, or behaviours
similar to other organizations

Influenced by:

Law

New regulation

Another organization
+
Institutional Similarity

3. Normative Forces: pressures to change to achieve
standards of professionalism, and to adopt techniques that
are considered by the professional community to be up-todate and effective

Universities, consulting firms, trade associations, and professional
training institutions develop norms among professionals

Companies accept norms through a sense of obligation to have
high performance standards

Norms almost have a moral/ethical requirement