Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Role of Organization Structure in Innovation in the Bulk- Drug Industry


Affiliations
1 (HRM Group), Indian Institute of Management Lucknow, Prabandhnagar, Off Sitapur Road, Lucknow 226013, India
2 Dept. of Humanities & Social Sciences (H&SS), Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


This study explores the relationship between Organization Structure and Innovation in the bulk-drug firms of India. Structure variables include Horizontal Complexity, Formalization, Centralization, Concentration of Authority and Participation in Decision-Making. Innovation includes Number of Innovations and Perceived Innovation. Data was collected from employees of two leading bulk-drug firms of India. Qualitative analysis was done using content-analysis. Statistical analysis showed significant relationship between horizontal complexity and number of innovations. Negative and significant relationship has been obtained between Centralization and Innovation and between Concentration of Authority and Innovation. A positive and significant relationship has been obtained between Participation in decision- making and Innovation.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Bart, C. (2004), “Innovation, Mission Statements and Learning”, International Journal of Technology Management, 27 (6/7): 544 – 61.
  • Bommer, M. & Jalajas, D. S. (2004), “Innovation Sources of Large and Small Technologybased Firms”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51 (1): 13 – 18 Cross, R., Nohria, N.& Parker A. (2002), “Six Myths about Informal Networks - and How to Overcome Them”, MIT Sloan Management Review, 43 (3): 67 – 75.
  • Daftaur, C. N. (1988), Cited in D. M. Pestonjee (Ed.), Second Handbook of Psychological and Social Instruments. New Delhi: Concept Publishing
  • Dessler, G. (1986), Organization Theory: Integrating Structure and Behaviour, Prentice Hall.
  • Drach-Zahany, A., Somech, A., Granot, M. & Spitzer, A. (2004), “Can We Win Them All? Benefits and Costs of Structured and Flexible Innovation Implementations”’ Journal of Organization Behavior,25 (2): 217 – 34.
  • Dunphy, D. and Bryant, B. (1996), “Teams: Panaceas or Prescriptions for Improved Performance”, Human Relations.49: 677 – 99.
  • Hage, J. & Aiken, M. (1977). Cited in D. C. Miller, Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. New York: David McKay
  • Hage, J. T. (1999), “Organizational Innovation and Organizational Change”. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 597 – 622.
  • Jacob, N. (1998), Creativity in Organizations, New Delhi: A. H. Wheelar.
  • Kanter, R. M. (2004), “The Middle Manager as Innovator”, Harvard Business Review. 82 (7/8): 150 – 61.
  • Khandwalla, P. N. (1995), Management Styles, New Delhi: Tata-McGraw Hill.
  • Khandwalla, P. N. & Mehta, K. (2004), “Design of Corporate Creativity”. Vikalpa, 29 (1): 13–28.
  • Lewis, M. W., Welsh, M. A., Dehler, G. E. & Green, S. G. (2002), “Product Development Tensions: Exploring Contrasting Styles of Project Management”, Academy of Management Journal. 45 (3): 546 – 64.
  • McNulty, T. & Ferlie, E. (2004), “Process Transformation: Limitations to Radical Organizational Change within Public Service Organizations”, Organization Studies. 25: 1389 – 1412.
  • Mintrom, M. (2003), “Market Organizations and Deliberative Democracy: Choice and Voice in Public Service Delivery”, Administration and Society. 35: 52 – 81.
  • Pavitt, K. (1994), “Key Characteristics of Large Innovating Firms”, in M. Dodgson & R. Rothwell (Eds.), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation, Edward Elgar
  • Reddy, A. A. (1974), Cited in U. Pareek and T. V. Rao, Handbook of Psychological and Social Instruments. Baroda: Samashti
  • Rothwell, R. (1992), “Successful Industrial Innovation: Critical Factors for the 1990’s”, R&D Management, 22 (3): 221 – 39.
  • Samaratunge, R. (2003), “Decentralization Policies in Sri Lanka: Perceptions and Performance”, South Asian Journal of Management. 10 (2): 30 – 43.
  • Schultz, M. & Schilling, M. A. (1998), “Improving the Organization of Environmental Management: Ecosystem Management, External Interdependencies, and Agency Structures”, Public Performance and Management Review, 21 (3): 293 – 308
  • Shadur, M. A., Kienzle, R. and Rodwell, J. J. (1999), “The Relationship between Organizational Climate and Employee Perceptions of Involvement: The Importance of Support”, Group and Organization Management. 24: 479 – 503.
  • Sharma M. M. (2000), “Innovation in the Chemical Industry”, in S. Purkayastha (Ed.), Global Innovation Strategies, New Delhi: Tata McGraw - Hill
  • Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.)( 2003), The International Handbook on Innovation, Elsevier Science.
  • Singh, A. P.& Pestonjee D. M. (1988) Cited in D. M. Pestonjee. (Ed.), Second Handbook of Psychological and Social Instruments. New Delhi: Concept Publishing
  • Souitaris, V. (2002), “Firm-Specific Competencies Determining Technological Innovation: A Survey in Greece”, R&D Management, 32 (1): 61-77
  • Srivastava, D. K. (1991), Organizational Effectiveness: Role of Organizational Structure and Process, and Personality. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Bombay
  • Strauss, G., Heller, F., Pusic, E. & Wilpert, B. (1998), Organizational Participation: Myth and Reality, Oxford University Press.
  • Troy, L. C., Szymanski, D. M. and Varadarajan, P. R. (2001), “Generating New Product Ideas: An Initial Investigation of the Role of Market Information and Organizational Characteristics”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29: 89 – 101.
  • Vedamanickam, J. (2001), Study of Workplace Innovativeness in Manufacturing, Ph.D. Thesis, Sailesh J. Mehta School of Management, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay.
  • West, M. A. (2000), “Creativity and Innovation at Work”, in M. Vartiainen F. Avallone and N. Anderson (Eds.), Innovative Theories, Tools and Practices in Work and Organizational Psychology, Canada: Hogrefe and Huber Publishers
  • West, M. A. (1990), “The Social Psychology of Innovation in Groups.” in M. A. West and J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and Creativity at Work: Psychological and Organizational Strategies, Chichester Wiley
  • Wijnberg, N. M., Ende, J. V. D. & Wit, O. D. (2002), “Decision Making at Different Levels of the Organization and the Impact of New Information Technology: Two Cases from Financial Sector,” Group and Organization Management, 27 (3): 408 – 29.

Abstract Views: 274

PDF Views: 0




  • Role of Organization Structure in Innovation in the Bulk- Drug Industry

Abstract Views: 274  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Yamini Prakash Sahay
(HRM Group), Indian Institute of Management Lucknow, Prabandhnagar, Off Sitapur Road, Lucknow 226013, India
Meenakshi Gupta
Dept. of Humanities & Social Sciences (H&SS), Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India

Abstract


This study explores the relationship between Organization Structure and Innovation in the bulk-drug firms of India. Structure variables include Horizontal Complexity, Formalization, Centralization, Concentration of Authority and Participation in Decision-Making. Innovation includes Number of Innovations and Perceived Innovation. Data was collected from employees of two leading bulk-drug firms of India. Qualitative analysis was done using content-analysis. Statistical analysis showed significant relationship between horizontal complexity and number of innovations. Negative and significant relationship has been obtained between Centralization and Innovation and between Concentration of Authority and Innovation. A positive and significant relationship has been obtained between Participation in decision- making and Innovation.

References