Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Literature Review

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Managing Multiple Organizational Goals in Turbulent Environments

  • 161 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents a broad spectrum of literatures upon which to build understanding of the examined constructs. We aim to extend the understanding of multiple organizational goals to be more inclusive of organizational control and environmental turbulence. To better understand the approaches of managing multiple goals, we propose the notion of goal polychronicity, examining two distinct theoretical models regarding organizational controls as antecedents of goal polychronicity and the performance impact of goal polychronicity to answer the two main research questions. To provide the theoretical background on the constructs that support these theorized models, this chapter reviews the literature regarding organizational goals, organizational control, and environmental turbulence. Key implications from these literatures are drawn for further hypothesis development and to provide insights for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 61–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10(1), 43–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, M., Bacharach, S. B., & French, J. L. (1980). Organizational structure, work process, and proposal making in administrative bureaucracies. Academy of Management Journal, 23(4), 631–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and environments. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, M. R., Adomdza, G. K., & Meyer, M. H. (2015). Managing for innovation: Managerial control and employee level outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 68(2), 371–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E., & Oliver, R. L. (1987). Perspectives on behavior-based versus outcome-based salesforce control systems. The Journal of Marketing, 51(4), 76–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, J., & Smith, D. C. (1996). In search of the marketing imagination: Factors affecting the creativity of marketing programs for mature products. Journal of Marketing Research, 33(2), 174–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angriawan, A., & Abebe, M. (2011). Chief executive background characteristics and environmental scanning emphasis: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Strategies, 28(1), 75–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I. (1965). Corporate strategy: An analytic approach to business policy for growth and expansion. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I. (1979). Strategic management. Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I. (1984). Implanting strategic management. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I. (1987). The emerging paradigm of strategic behavior. Strategic Management Journal, 8(6), 501–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I. (1991). Critique of Henry Mintzberg’s ‘The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management.’ Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 449–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I., Sullivan, P. A., Antoniou, P., Chabane, H., Djohar, S., Jaja, R., et al. (1993). Empirical proof of a paradigmic theory of strategic success behaviors of environment serving organizations. In D. E. Hussey (Ed.), International review of strategic management (pp. 173–202). Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arndt, A., Arnold, T. J., & Landry, T. D. (2006). The effects of polychronic-orientation upon retail employee satisfaction and turnover. Journal of Retailing, 82(4), 319–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2007). Performance implications of the direct and moderating effects of centralization and formalization on customer orientation. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(8), 1022–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baert, C., Meuleman, M., Debruyne, M., & Wright, M. (2016). Portfolio entrepreneurship and resource orchestration. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(4), 346–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, T., & Nelson, R. E. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2008). An attention-based view of real options reasoning. Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 606–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., & Arikan, A. M. (2001). The resource-based view: Origins and implications. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. R. Harrison (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management. Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., Wright, M., & Ketchen, D. J. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27(6), 625–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, P. S., Stimpert, J. L., & Huff, A. S. (1992). Cognitive change, strategic action, and organizational renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1), 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. A., & Dahlin, K. B. (2007). Aspiration performance and railroads’ patterns of learning from train wrecks and crashes. Organization Science, 18(3), 368–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, R. J., & Wally, S. (2003). Strategic decision speed and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1107–1129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berchicci, L., & Tarakci, M. (2022). Aspiration formation and attention rules. Strategic Management Journal, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettis, R. A., & Hitt, M. A. (1995). The new competitive landscape. Strategic Management Journal, 16(S1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, C. B., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Furr, N. R. (2007). What makes a process a capability? Heuristics, strategy, and effective capture of opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1–2), 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blettner, D. P., He, Z. L., Hu, S., & Bettis, R. A. (2015). Adaptive aspirations and performance heterogeneity: Attention allocation among multiple reference points. Strategic Management Journal, 36(7), 987–1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bluedorn, A. C., Kalliath, T. J., Strube, M. J., & Martin, G. D. (1999). Polychronicity and the inventory of polychronic values (IPV): The development of an instrument to measure a fundamental dimension of organizational culture. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14(3/4), 205–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bluedorn, A. C., Kaufman, C. F., & Lane, P. M. (1992). How many things do you like to do at once? An introduction to monochronic and polychronic time. The Executive, 6(4), 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeois, L. J., III., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1988). Strategic decision processes in high velocity environments: Four cases in the microcomputer industry. Management Science, 34(7), 816–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeois, L. J. (1980). Performance and consensus. Strategic Management Journal, 1(3), 227–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, H. P., & Wiersema, M. F. (2005). Foreign-based competition and corporate diversification strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1153–1171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brozovic, D. (2018). Strategic flexibility: A review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20, 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T. E., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The Management of innovation. Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardinal, L. B. (2001). Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The use of organizational control in managing research and development. Organization Science, 12(1), 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinal, L. B., Kreutzer, M. F., & Miller, C. C. (2017). An aspirational view of organizational control research: Re-invigorating empirical work to better meet the challenges of 21st century organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 11(2), 559–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinal, L. B., Sitkin, S. B., & Long, C. P. (2004). Balancing and rebalancing in the creation and evolution of organizational control. Organization Science, 15(4), 411–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, S. J., & Tosi, H. L. (1973). Management by objectives: Applications and research. Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castrogiovanni, G. J. (1991). Environmental munificence: A theoretical assessment. The Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 542–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavusgil, S. T., & Nevin, J. R. (1981). Internal determinants of export marketing behavior: An empirical investigation. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 114–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick, C., Super, J. F., & Kwon, K. (2015). Resource orchestration in practice: CEO emphasis on SHRM, commitment-based HR systems, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 36(3), 360–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravarthy, B. (1997). A new strategy framework for coping with turbulence. Sloan Management Review, 38(2), 69–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A. D. (1962). Strategy and Structure. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, A., Peng, N., & Hung, K. P. (2015). Managing salespeople strategically when promoting new products—Incorporating market orientation into a sales management control framework. Industrial Marketing Management, 47, 147–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M. M., Luckett, P. F., & Mahama, H. (2007). Effect of perceived conflict among multiple performance goals and goal difficulty on task performance. Accounting and Finance, 47(2), 221–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choudhury, V., & Sabherwal, R. (2003). Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects. Information Systems Research, 14(3), 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, C. E. H., Lim, W.-K., Soh, C., & Sia, S. K. (2012). Enacting clan control in complex IT projects: A social capital perspective. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 577–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coles, J. W., McWilliams, V. B., & Sen, N. (2001). An examination of the relationship of governance mechanisms to performance. Journal of Management, 27(1), 23–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crespo, N. F., Rodrigues, R., Samagaio, A., & Silva, G. M. (2018). The adoption of management control systems by start-ups: Internal factors and context as determinants. Journal of Business Research, 101, 875–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Adderio, L. (2014). The replication dilemma unravelled: How organizations enact multiple goals in routine transfer. Organization Science, 25(5), 1325–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Aveni, R. A. (1994). Hypercompetition: Managing the dynamics of strategic maneuvering. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Macintosh, N. B. (1984). The nature and use of formal control systems for management control and strategy implementation. Journal of Management, 10(1), 43–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., Sormunen, J., & Parks, D. (1998). Chief executive scanning, environmental characteristics, and company performance. Strategic Management Journal, 9(2), 123–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, R. J., & Han, S.-K. (2004). A systematic assessment of the empirical support for transaction cost economics. Strategic Management Journal, 25(1), 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bingham, C. B. (2009). Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(3), 413–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Kotlar, J., Mazzola, P., Minola, T., & Sciascia, S. (2018). Conflicting selves: Family owners’ multiple goals and self-control agency problems in private firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 42(3), 362–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, H., Donada, C., Mothe, C., & Nogatchewsky, G. (2019). Boundary spanner relational behavior and inter-organizational control in supply chain relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, 77, 143–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deshon, R. P., Kozlowski, S., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R., & Wiechmann, D. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1035–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 52–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibrell, C., Down, J., & Bull, L. (2007). Dynamic strategic planning: Achieving strategic flexibility through formalization. Journal of Business and Management, 13(1), 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dionysiou, D. D., & Tsoukas, H. (2013). Understanding the (re) creation of routines from within: A symbolic interactionist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 181–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downey, H. K., Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1975). Environmental uncertainty: The construct and its application. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(4), 613–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. (2010). Embedding strategic agility: A leadership agenda for accelerating business model renewal. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 370–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R. B. (1972). Characteristics of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 313–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J. E., & Jackson, S. E. (1987). Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1985). Control: Organizational and economic approaches. Management Science, 31(2), 134–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 543–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. (2010). Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science, 21(6), 1263–1273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Sull, D. N. (2001). Strategy as simple rules. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Tabrizi, B. N. (1995). Accelerating adaptive processes: Product innovation in the global computer industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 84–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18(1), 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ennen, E., & Richter, A. (2010). The whole Is more than the sum of its parts—Or is it? A review of the empirical literature on complementarities in organizations. Journal of Management, 36(1), 207–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ethiraj, S. K., & Levinthal, D. (2009). Hoping for A to Z while rewarding only A: Complex organizations and multiple goals. Organization Science, 20(1), 4–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, K. R., Landry, T. D., Li, P. C., & Zou, S. (2007). How sales controls affect job-related outcomes: The role of organizational sales-related psychological climate perceptions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(3), 445–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as a duality. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 202–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(1), 94–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiegenbaum, A., Hart, S., & Schendel, D. (1996). Strategic reference point theory. Strategic Management Journal, 17(3), 219–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flamholtz, E. G., Das, T. K., & Tsui, A. S. (1985). Toward an integrative framework of organizational control. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(1), 35–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, J. W. (1986). The strategic decision process and organizational structure. Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 280–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, J. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1984). Strategic decision processes: Comprehensiveness and performance in an industry with an unstable environment. Academy of Management Journal, 27(2), 399–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. S., Homberg, F., & Osterloh, M. (2013). Organizational control systems and pay-for-performance in the public service. Organization Studies, 34(7), 949–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaba, V., & Greve, H. R. (2019). Safe or profitable? The pursuit of conflicting goals. Organization Science, 30(4), 647–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galdon-Sanchez, J. E., & Schmitz, J. (2002). Competitive pressure and labor productivity: World iron-ore markets in the 1980’s. American Economic Review, 92(4), 1222–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P. A. (1990). Innovation, technological opportunity, and market structure. Oxford Economic Papers, 42(3), 586–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, S., & Wu, A. (2021). Iterative coordination and innovation: Prioritizing value over novelty. Organization Science (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldbach, T., Benlian, A., & Buxmann, P. (2018). Differential effects of formal and self-control in mobile platform ecosystems: Multi-method findings on third-party developers’ continuance intentions and application quality. Information & Management, 55(3), 271–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goold, M., & Quinn, J. J. (1990). The paradox of strategic controls. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Govindarajan, V., & Fisher, J. (1990). Strategy, control systems, and resource sharing: Effects on business-unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 259–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R. W., Beck, R., & Keil, M. (2013). Control balancing in information systems development offshoring projects. MIS Quarterly, 37(4), 1211–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R. W., & Keil, M. (2014). Blending bureaucratic and collaborative management styles to achieve control ambidexterity in IS projects. European Journal of Information Systems, 23(3), 343–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. (1998). Performance, aspirations, and risky organizational change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(1), 58–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. (2003). A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovations: Evidence from shipbuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 685–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. (2008). A behavioral theory of firm growth: Sequential attention to size and performance goals. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3), 476–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. (1990). Understanding cultural differences. Intercultural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. H. (1982). Organizations. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizational ecology. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T., & Haas, M. R. (2001). Competing for attention in knowledge markets: Electronic document dissemination in a management consulting company. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J., & Bromiley, P. (2007). Incentives to cheat: The influence of executive compensation and firm performance on financial misrepresentation. Organization Science, 18(3), 350–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heumann, J., Wiener, M., Remus, U., & Mahring, M. (2015). To coerce or to enable? Exercising formal control in a large information systems project. Journal of Information Technology, 30(4), 337–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, S. C., & Bettis, R. A. (2018). Multiple organization goals with feedback from shared technological task environments. Organization Science, 29(5), 873–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huff, A. S., & Reger, R. K. (1987). A review of strategic process research. Journal of Management, 13(2), 211–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilinitch, A. Y., D’Aveni, R. A., & Lewin, A. Y. (1996). New organizational forms and strategies for managing in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(3), 211–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, D. N., & Miller, K. D. (2008). Performance feedback, slack, and the timing of acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 808–822.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, J. B. (1988). Toward a theory of marketing control: Environmental context, control types, and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 23–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (2010). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 22(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, A. H., & Audia, P. G. (2012). Self-enhancement and learning from performance feedback. Academy of Management Review, 37(2), 211–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kale, P., Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (2002). Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function. Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 747–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). Transforming the balanced scorecard from performance measurement to strategic management: Part I. Accounting Horizons, 15(1), 87–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karim, S., Carroll, T. N., & Long, C. P. (2016). Delaying change: Examining how industry and managerial turbulence impact structural realignment (Article). Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 791–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, C. F., Lane, P. M., & Lindquist, J. D. (1991). Exploring more than 24 hours a day: A preliminary investigation of polychronic time use. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(3), 392–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 570–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., Walter, J., Lechner, C., & Floyd, S. W. (2005). The lack of consensus about strategic consensus: Advancing theory and research. Journal of Management, 31(5), 719–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, S., & Landauer, S. (2004). Using stretch goals to promote organizational effectiveness and personal growth: General electric and Goldman Sachs. The Academy of Management Executive, 18(4), 134–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keum, D. D., & Eggers, J. P. (2018). Setting the bar: The evaluative and allocative roles of organizational aspirations. Organization Science, 29(6), 1170–1186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khandwalla, P. N. (1977). The Design of Organizations. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, L. J. (1996). The management of complex tasks in organizations: Controlling the systems development process. Organization Science, 7(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, l. J., & Choudhury, V. (2010). Toward a theory of relational control: How relationship structure influences the choice of control. In S. B. Sitkin, L. B. Cardinal, & K. Bijlsma-Frankema (Eds.), Organizational control (pp. 301–323). Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, L. J., Ko, D.-G., & Haney, M. H. (2010). Investigating the antecedents of team-based clan control: Adding social capital as a predictor. Organization Science, 21(2), 469–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraaijenbrink, J., Spender, J. C., & Groen, A. J. (2010). The resource-based view: A review and assessment of its critiques. Journal of Management, 36(1), 349–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreutzer, M., Cardinal, L. B., Walter, J., & Lechner, C. (2016). Formal and informal control as complement or substitute? The role of the task environment. Strategy Science, 1(4), 235–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreutzer, M., Walter, J., & Cardinal, L. B. (2015). Organizational control as antidote to politics in the pursuit of strategic initiative performance. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9), 1317–1337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labianca, G., Fairbank, J. F., Andrevski, G., & Parzen, M. (2009). Striving toward the future: Aspiration-performance discrepancies and planned organizational change. Strategic Organization, 7(4), 433–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D., & March, J. G. (1981). A model of adaptive organizational search. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 2(4), 307–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A., & Rerup, C. (2020). The plural of goal: Learning in a world of ambiguity. Organization Science, 32(3), 527–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y. H., Chen, C. J., & Lin, B. W. (2017). The influence of strategic control and operational control on new venture performance. Management Decision, 55(5), 1042–1064.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg, S., & Foss, N. J. (2011). Managing joint production motivation: The role of goal framing and governance mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 36(3), 500–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., & Deng, Z. (2015). How environment risks moderate the effect of control on performance in information technology projects: Perspectives of project managers and user liaisons. International Journal of Information Management, 35(1), 80–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., & Wang, L. (2014). User liaisons’ perspective on behavior and outcome control in IT projects. Management Decision, 52(6), 1148–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3(2), 157–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task performance. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: a 35year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969–1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90(1), 125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions: Introduction and critical surveys. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, Y., Tan, J. J., & O’Connor, N. G. (2001). Strategic response to a volatile environment: The case of cross-cultural cooperative ventures. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 18(1), 7–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mähring, M., Wiener, M., & Remus, U. (2018). Getting the control across: Control transmission in information systems offshoring projects. Information Systems Journal, 28(4), 708–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, D. E. W. (2002). Management control systems and their effects on strategy formation at middle-management levels: Evidence from a U.K. organization. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 1019–1031.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. A., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2010). Rewiring: Cross-business-unit collaborations in multibusiness organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(2), 265–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, J. E., & Selsky, J. (1984). Hyperturbulence and the emergence of type 5 environments. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 460–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, I. P., Lawrence, T. B., Wixted, B., & Gordon, B. R. (2010). A multidimensional conceptualization of environmental velocity. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 604–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, G., Vaaler, P. M., & Devers, C. (2003). Same as it ever was: The search for evidence of increasing hypercompetition. Strategic Management Journal, 24(3), 261–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mezias, S. J., Chen, Y. R., & Murphy, P. R. (2002). Aspiration-level adaptation in an American financial services organization: A field study. Management Science, 48(10), 1285–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miao, C. F., & Evans, K. R. (2014). Motivating industrial salesforce with sales control systems: An interactive perspective. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1233–1242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1980). Momentum and revolution in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 23(4), 591–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. D., & Chen, W.-R. (2004). Variable organizational risk preferences: Tests of the March-Shapira model. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 105–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milliken, F. J. (1987). Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: State, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 133–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1981). Organizational design: Fashion or fit? Harvard Business Review, 59(1), 103–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadkarni, S., & Barr, P. (2008). Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: An integrated view. Strategic Management Journal, 29(13), 1395–1428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadkarni, S., & Herrmann, P. (2010). CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1050–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. K. (2007). Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3), 243–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narayanaswamy, R., Grover, V., & Henry, M. R. (2013). The impact of influence tactics in information system development projects: A control-loss perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 30(1), 191–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, T. T., Mia, L., Winata, L., & Chong, V. K. (2017). Effect of transformational-leadership style and management control system on managerial performance. Journal of Business Research, 70, 202–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obloj, T., & Sengul, M. (2020). What do multiple objectives really mean for performance? Empirical evidence from the French manufacturing sector. Strategic Management Journal, 41(13), 2518–2547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocasio, W. (2011). Attention to attention. Organization Science, 22(5), 1286–1296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okhuysen, G. A., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2002). Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organization Science, 13(4), 370–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orly, L., Beechler, S., Sully, T., & Boyacigiller, N. A. (2007). What we talk about when we talk about ‘global mindset’: Managerial cognition in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(2), 231–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1977). The relationship between organizational structure and organizational control. Academy of Management Journal, 22(1), 95–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1978). The transmission of control through organizational hierarchy. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 173–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25, 833–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 129–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G., & Maguire, M. A. (1975). Organizational control: Two functions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(4), 559–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan, S. L., Cui, M., & Qian, J. (2020). Information resource orchestration during the COVID-19 pandemic: A study of community lockdowns in China. International Journal of Information Management, 54, 102–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panagiotou, G. (2007). Reference theory: Strategic groups and competitive benchmarking. Management Decision, 45(10), 1595–1621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H. D., & Steensma, H. K. (2012). When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures? Strategic Management Journal, 33(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P. C. (2011). Role of manufacturing flexibility in managing duality of formalization and environmental uncertainty in emerging firms. Journal of Operations Management, 29(1), 143–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W. (2003). Institutional transitions and strategic choices. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 275–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, M. D., Gudergan, S., & Booth, P. (2019). Interactive profit-planning systems and market turbulence: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1978). Organizational design. Arlington Heights, IL Harlan Davidson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramus, T., Vaccaro, A., & Brusoni, S. (2017). Institutional complexity in turbulent times: Formalization, collaboration, and the emergence of blended logics. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1253–1284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray, G., Barney, J. B., & Muhanna, W. A. (2004). Capabilities, business processes, and competitive advantage: Choosing the dependent variable in empirical tests of the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 25(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repenning, N. P., Kieffer, D., & Repenning, J. (2018). A new approach to designing work. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(2), 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V. P., Becerra, M., & Contardo, I. (2004). Enacting competitive wars: Competitive activity, language games, and market consequences. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 670–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romanelli, E., & Tushman, M. L. (1994). Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1141–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. P. (1991). How much does industry matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12(3), 167–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Self-determination theory and the role of basic psychological needs in personality and the organization of behavior. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 645–678). The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samagaio, A., Crespo, N. F., & Rodrigues, R. (2018). Management control systems in high-tech start-ups: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 89, 351–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Exposito, M. J., & Naranjo-Gil, D. (2017). Effects of management control systems and cognitive orientation on misreporting: An experiment. Management Decision, 55(3), 579–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 35(2), 179–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, R. (1985). Do markets differ much? The American Economic Review, 75(3), 341–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmoltzi, C., & Wallenburg, C. M. (2012). Operational governance in horizontal cooperations of logistics service providers: Performance effects and the moderating role of cooperation complexity. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 48(2), 53–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnatterly, K. (2003). Increasing firm value through detection and prevention of white-collar crime. Strategic Management Journal, 24(7), 587–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D. A., McMullen, J. S., & Ocasio, W. (2017). Is that an opportunity? An attentional model of top managers’ opportunity beliefs for strategic action. Strategic Management Journal, 38(3), 626–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shinkle, G. A. (2012). Organizational aspirations, reference points, and goals building on the past and aiming for the future. Journal of Management, 38(1), 415–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shinkle, G. A., & Kriauciunas, A. P. (2012). The impact of current and founding institutions on strength of competitive aspirations in transition economies. Strategic Management Journal, 33(4), 448–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shipp, A. J., Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J. C., & Palmer, T. B. (2003). Organizational performance referents: An empirical examination of their content and influences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90(2), 209–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow, N. (2001). Change in the presence of fit: The rise, the fall, and the renaissance of Liz Claiborne. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 838–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow, N., & Rivkin, J. W. (2005). Speed and search: Designing organizations for turbulence and complexity (Article). Organization Science, 16(2), 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sihag, V., & Rijsdijk, S. A. (2019). Organizational controls and performance outcomes: A meta-analytic assessment and extension. Journal of Management Studies, 56(1), 91–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations. Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. (1991). Strategic orientation and top management attention to control systems. Strategic Management Journal, 12(1), 49–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. (1995). Control in an age of empowerment. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 80–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, H. P. (1996). Businesses without Bosses. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 273–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Gilbert, B. A. (2011). Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1390–1412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitkin, S. B., & Roth, N. L. (1993). Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organization Science, 4(3), 367–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitkin, S. B., See, K. E., Miller, C. C., Lawless, M. W., & Carton, A. M. (2011). The paradox of stretch goals: Organizations in pursuit of the seemingly impossible. Academy of Management Review, 36(3), 544–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. F., Olson, E. M., & Hult, G. T. M. (2006). The moderating influence of strategic orientation on the strategy formation capability–performance relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1221–1231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smart, P. A., Maddern, H., & Maull, R. S. (2009). Understanding business process management: Implications for theory and practice. British Journal of Management, 20(4), 491–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. G., & Cao, Q. (2007). An entrepreneurial perspective on the firm-environment relationship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(3–4), 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. G., Mitchell, T. R., & Summer, C. E. (1985). Top level management priorities in different stages of the organizational life cycle. Academy of Management Journal, 28(4), 799–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Besharov, M. L. (2019). Bowing before dual gods: How structured flexibility sustains organizational hybridity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 64(1), 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snell, S. A. (1992). Control theory in strategic human resource management: The mediating effect of administrative information. Academy of Management Journal, 35(2), 292–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, M., Droge, C., Hanvanich, S., & Calantone, R. (2005). Marketing and technology resource complementarity: An analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 259–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Souitaris, V., & Maestro, B. M. M. (2010). Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 652–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starbuck, W. H. (1976). Organizations and their environments. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1069–1123). Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. M., Sandelands, L. E., & Dutton, J. E. (1981). Threat rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(4), 501–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R., Moray, N., Bruneel, J., & Clarysse, B. (2015). Attention allocation to multiple goals: The case of for-profit social enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 36(7), 1006–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. N., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Beyond talk: Creating autonomous motivation through self-determination theory. Journal of General Management, 34(3), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terreberry, S. (1968). The evolution of organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(4), 590–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, L. G. (1996). The two faces of competition: Dynamic resourcefulness and the hypercompetitive shift (Article). Organization Science, 7(3), 221–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in action. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiwana, A., & Keil, M. (2009). Control in internal and outsourced software projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(3), 9–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tung, R. L. (1979). Dimensions of organizational environments: An exploratory study of their impact on organization structure. Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 672–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, K. L., & Makhija, M. V. (2006). The role of organizational controls in managing knowledge. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 197–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vancouver, J. B., Weinhardt, J. M., & Schmidt, A. M. (2010). A formal, computational theory of multiple-goal pursuit: Integrating goal-choice and goal-striving processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(6), 985–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velez, M. L., Sanchez, J. M., Florez, R., & Concha, A. (2015). How control system information characteristics affect exporter–intermediary relationship quality. International Business Review, 24(5), 812–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volberda, H. W., van der Weerdt, N., Verwaal, E., Stienstra, M., & Verdu, A. J. (2012). Contingency fit, institutional fit, and firm performance: A metafit approach to organization–environment relationships. Organization Science, 23(4), 1040–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, J., Kreutzer, M., & Kreutzer, K. (2020). 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 Studies, 58(3), 849–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1947). Theory of social and economic organization. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, M., Mahring, M., Remus, U., & Saunders, C. (2016). Control configuration and control enactment in information systems projects: Review and expanded theoretical framework. MIS Quarterly, 40(3), 741–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, M., Remus, U., Heumann, J., & Mähring, M. (2015). The effective promotion of informal control in information systems offshoring projects. European Journal of Information Systems, 24(6), 569–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, R. R., & Ruefli, T. W. (2005). Schumpeter’s ghost: Is hypercompetition making the best of times shorter? Strategic Management Journal, 26(10), 887–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijethilake, C., Munir, R., & Appuhami, R. (2018). Environmental innovation strategy and organizational performance: Enabling and controlling uses of management control systems. Journal of Business Ethics, 151, 1139–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilden, R., & Gudergan, S. P. (2015). The impact of dynamic capabilities on operational marketing and technological capabilities: Investigating the role of environmental turbulence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(2), 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, B., & Floyd, S. W. (1990). The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 11(3), 231–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, F., Shinkle, G. A., & Goudsmit, M. (2022a). The complementarity of control formalization and control flexibility: The contingent effects of competitive turbulence. Australian Journal of Management (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, F., Shinkle, G. A., & Goudsmit, M. (2022b). The efficacy of organizational control interactions: External environmental uncertainty as a critical contingency. Journal of Business Research, 139, 855–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, X., & Zajac, E. J. (2004). The strategy/governance structure fit relationship: Theory and evidence in franchising arrangements. Strategic Management Journal, 25(4), 365–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Asia Europe Business School, Faculty of Economics and Management, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

    Feifei Yang

  2. Nijmegen School of Management, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Mirjam Goudsmit

  3. UNSW-Sydney Business School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

    George Shinkle

Authors
  1. Feifei Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mirjam Goudsmit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George Shinkle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feifei Yang .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Yang, F., Goudsmit, M., Shinkle, G. (2022). Literature Review. In: Managing Multiple Organizational Goals in Turbulent Environments. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5319-4_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation