Sendil K. Ethiraj

Bounded Rationality and the Search for Organizational Architecture: An Evolutionary Perspective on the Design of Organizations and Their Evolvability

We employ a computational model of organizational adaptation to answer three research questions: (1) How does the architecture or structure of complexity affect the feasibility and usefulness of boundedly rational design efforts? (2) Do efforts to adapt organizational forms complicate or complement the effectiveness of first-order change efforts? and (3) To what extent does the rate of environmental change nullify the usefulness of design efforts? We employ a computational model of organizational adaptation to examine these questions. Our results, in identifying the boundary conditions around successful design efforts, suggest that the underlying architecture of complexity of organizations, particularly the presence of hierarchy, is a critical determinant of the feasibility and effectiveness of design efforts. We also find that design efforts are generally complementary to efforts at local performance improvement and identify specific contingencies that determine the extent of complementarity. We discuss the implications of our findings for organization theory and design and the literature on modularity in products and organizations.

The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation

Modularity has been heralded as an organizational and technical architecture that enhances incremental and modular innovation. Less attention has been paid to the possible implications of modular architectures for imitation. To understand the implications of modular designs for competitive advantage, one must consider the dual impact of modularity on innovation and imitation jointly. In an attempt to do so, we set up three alternative structures that vary in the extent of modularity and hence in the extent of design complexity: nonmodular, modular, and nearly modular designs. In each structure, we examine the trade-offs between innovation benefits and imitation deterrence. The results of our computational experiments indicate that modularization enables performance gains through innovation but, at the same time, sets the stage for those gains to be eroded through imitation. In contrast, performance differences between the leaders and imitators persist in the nearly modular and the nonmodular structures. Overall, we find that design complexity poses a significant trade-off between innovation benefits (i.e., generating superior strategies that create performance differences) and imitation deterrence (i.e., preserving the performance differences). We also examine the robustness of our results to variations in imitation accuracy. In addition to documenting the overall robustness of our principal finding, the ancillary analyses provide a more nuanced rendering of the relationship between the architecture of complexity and imitation efforts.

Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals

This paper explores the trade-offs inherent in the pursuit and fulfillment of multiple performance goals in complex organizations. We examine two related research questions: (1) What are the organizational implications of pursuing multiple performance goals? (2) Are local and myopic (as opposed to global) goal prioritization strategies effective in dealing with multiple goals? We employ a series of computational experiments to examine these questions. Our results from these experiments both formalize the intuition behind existing wisdom and provide new insights. We show that imposing a multitude of weakly correlated performance measures on even simple organizations (i.e., an organization comprised of independent employees) leads to a performance freeze in that actors are not able to identify choices that enhance organizational performance across the full array of goals. This problem increases as the degree of interdependence of organizational action increases. We also find that goal myopia, spatial differentiation of performance goals, and temporal differentiation of performance goals help rescue organizations from this status quo trap. In addition to highlighting a new class of organizational problems, we argue that in a world of boundedly rational actors, incomplete guides to action in the sense of providing only a subset of underlying goals prove more effective at directing and coordinating behavior than more complete representations of underlying objectives. Management, in the form of the articulation of a subset of goals, provides a degree of clarity and focus in a complex world.

The Division of Gains from Complementarities in Human-Capital-Intensive Activity

This study uses data from the National Basketball Association to explore organizational mechanisms that affect the division of firm surplus in human-capital-intensive activity. It builds on the idea that reciprocal interdependence among team members creates the potential for complementarity. Complementarity, in turn, translates into higher firm surplus. The division of this surplus is subject to bargaining between the firm owner and labor. We argue that when complementarity increases, the firm owners share of surplus will grow if interdependence among team members is symmetric. Furthermore, we identify three levers that make complementarity amenable to managerial design: the nature of interaction among team members, the relative dominance of team members, and the composition of a team. We find that greater interaction among team members and higher recruitment of team-oriented individuals are associated with increased complementarity, whereas dominant team members are associated with reduced complementarity. The study contributes to the literature on organization design by extending its implications to the division of surplus in human-capital-intensive activity.

The Distribution of R&D Effort in Systemic Industries: Implications for Competitive Advantage

Systemic industries comprise groups of firms making component products that are valued as complements by consumers (PC, automobiles, aircraft, networking). In this study, we investigate the distribution of research effort across the technological system by individual firms as a basis for building competitive advantage. Our empirical setting is a sample of component makers in the personal computer system. We show that even in a sample dominated by focused component manufacturers, diversified research effort in the broader technological system improves R&D productivity in the component technology. Broad scope R&D in the rest of the system also increases the marginal benefits of research efforts in the component technology, though at a diminishing rate. We explore the determinants of this complementarity between the scope of system level research and the focus on component level research, and derive implications for competitive advantage.

Do Product Architectures Affect Innovation Productivity in Complex Product Ecosystems

Abstract In this paper, we seek to understand how changes in product architecture affect the innovation performance of firms in a complex product ecosystem. The canonical view in the literature is that changes in the technological dependencies between components, which define a product’s architecture, undermine the innovation efforts of incumbent firms because their product development efforts are built around existing architectures. We extend this prevailing view in arguing that component dependencies and changes in them affect firm innovation efforts via two principal mechanisms. First, component dependencies expand or constrain the choice set of firm component innovation efforts. From the perspective of any one component in a complex product (which we label the focal component), an increase in the flow of design information to the focal component from other (non-focal) components simultaneously increases the constraint on focal component firms in their choice of profitable R&D projects while decreasing the constraint on non-focal component firms. Second, asymmetries in component dependencies can confer disproportionate influence on some component firms in setting and dictating the trajectory of progress in the overall system. Increases in such asymmetric influence allow component firms to expand their innovation output. Using historical patenting data in the personal computer ecosystem, we develop fine-grained measures of interdependence between component technologies and changes in them over time. We find strong support for the empirical implications of our theory.

Determinants of Price in Custom Software: A Hedonic Analysis of Offshore Development Projects

The starting point for this paper is the general paucity of research on the demand-side of custom software development. As an initial step, we derive and estimate a Hedonic Pricing model using a sample of 160 projects executed by a large software solutions vendor based in India. Our results indicate that there are powerful economic incentives spurring the increasing trend toward offshoring of custom software projects. We estimate that the average annual decline in quality adjusted price amounted to about 14 percent. Second, we also estimate the contribution of quality and human capital to price premia in software projects which helps us pinpoint the targets of vendor effort allocation that will help boost client value functions. This leads us to speculate that the efficiency of custom software development can perhaps be improved by the allocation (or reallocation) of vendor resources designed to increase quality and delivery performance. We discuss the implications of our results for the research and practice of software development.

Corporation and its Shareholders: What Should B-Schools Teach?

Presents a colloquium on the role of business schools in teaching students about the kind of objectives the top managers should pursue. Principles behind the corporation and its shareholders; Purpose of business school instruction; Need for business schools to articulate their position and reflect the same in their curriculum, culture and incentive and punishment systems.

How Do Firms Appropriate Value from Employees with Transferable Skills? A Study of the Appropriation Puzzle in Actively Managed Mutual Funds

How do firms benefit from employees with transferable skills? The prevailing view is that labor market frictions that impede employee mobility or strategies that constrain skill transferability are the primary instruments for firms to appropriate value from human capital. The empirical evidence, however, suggests that employees continue to be mobile, and firms pay premiums to attract and retain employees with transferable skills. To reconcile theory with data, we use data from the mutual-fund industry, where it is widely documented that active fund managers appropriate more value than they generate. We develop a theory of positive externalities stemming from transferable human capital that we argue accrue mostly to the firm, and provide evidence of such externalities in the mutual fund context. Empirically, we decompose the skills of mutual-fund managers into task- and firm-specific components, and argue that managers with taskspecific skills generate positive externalities at the firm level that are not reflected in their performance measured at the fund level. We advance and test empirical hypotheses on the existence of these positive unmeasured externalities by examining whether managers with task-specific skills are more likely to be associated with activities such as mentoring, increased risk taking, and generating spillovers at the firm level. Our results show that managers with task-specific skills are indeed associated with greater positive externalities, compared with managers with firm-specific skills. We discuss the implications of our results for the literature on human-capital value creation and appropriation.