Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Testing Turbulence: Exploring the Determinants of Managerial Networking

  • Published:
Public Organization Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A scholarly consensus holds that turbulent environments have damaging effects on public service performance. Turbulence, both internal and external organizations, has been demonstrated to negatively impact chances for organizations to meet goals and sometimes to survive. Less scholarly attention, however, is paid to how turbulence affects managerial strategy. This paper seeks to address how managerial strategy changes toward external environments and investigates what alternations managers make to combat turbulence. This question is theoretically and practically appropriate to comprehensively understand the effects of environmental turbulence for public organizations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For example, the average district has an enrollment of 3,986 students, yet the range is from 7 to 211,762 students. The standard deviation of 11,917 suggests the data include a variety of districts, ranging from small to large.

References

  • Aldrich, H. (1999). Organizations evolving. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. R., & Paine, F. T. (1975). Managerial perceptions and strategic behavior. The Academy of Management Journal, 18, 811–823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, P., & Tushman, M. (2001). Organizational environments and industry exit: the effects of uncertainty, munificence and complexity. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 675–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, R. (2009). Organizational task environments and performance: An empirical analysis. International Public Management Journal, 12(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aragon-Correa, J., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 71–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmos, D. P., & McDaniel, R. R. (1996). “The role of external critical task specialists in strategic decision making”. Decision Sciences, 26(4).

  • Ashmos, D., Duchon, D., & McDaniel, R., Jr. (2000). Organizational responses to complexity: the effect on organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13(6), 577–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bidwell, C. (1965). The school as a formal organization. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 972–1022). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boisot, M., & Child, J. (1999). “Organizations as adaptive systems in complex environments: the case of China.”. Organization Science, 10(3), 237–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeois, L. J., III. (1980). Strategy and environment: a conceptual integration. Academy of Management Review, 5(1), 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeois, L., Jay, D., McAllister, D. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978). The effects of different organizational environments upon decisions about organizational structure. The Academy of Management Journal, 21, 508–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, B., Dess, G., & Rasheed, A. (1993). Divergence between archival and perceptual measures of the environment: Causes and consequences. Academy of Management Review, 18, 204–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyne, G. A., & Meier, K. J. (2009). “Environmental turbulence, organizational stability, and public service performance. Administration and Society, 40(8), 799–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., & Stalker, G. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S. (1984). Organizational adaptation and higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 55, 122–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K., Myung, K., & Whitten, D. (1987). Organizational effects of decline and turbulence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 222–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A. D., Jr. (1962). Strategy and structure. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1990). Equality and achievement in education. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner, D. (1998). Leading at the edge of chaos: how to create a nimble organization. New York: Wiley & Sons.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (1995). American anti-management theories of organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (1996). For positivist organization theory. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. (1980). Managing in turbulent times. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R. (1973). Multiple decision making structures in adapting to environmental uncertainty. Human Relations, 26, 273–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, W. N., Murray, S. E., & Schwab, R. M. (1997). Schoolhouses, courthouses, and statehouses after Serrano. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 16(Winter), 10–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S., Stewart, W., Sweo, R., & Luker, W. (2000). Convergence versus strategic reorientation: The antecedents of fast-paced organizational change. Journal of Management, 26, 911–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1989). Organizations and social structure. In Organizational ecology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. (1996). School resources and student performance. In B. Gary (Ed.), Does money matter (pp. 43–73). Washington: Brookings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R. (2004). Organizational task environments: An evaluation of convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 857–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., & Greenwald, R. (1996). Have times changed? The relation between school resources and student performance. In B. Gary (Ed.), Does money matter? (pp. 74–92). Washington: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicklin, A. K. (2004). Network stability: Opportunity or obstacle? Public Organization Review, 4, 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicklin, A., O’Toole, L., Meier, K. J., & Robinson, S. (2009). Calming the storms: Collaborative public management, hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and disaster response. In R. O’Leary & L. Bingham (Eds.), The Collaborative Public Manager: New Ideas for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown.

  • Hofer, C. (1980). Turnaround strategies. The Journal of Business Strategy, 1, 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. (1984). The nature and design of post-industrial organizations. Management Science, 30(8), 928–951.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jencks, C., & Phillips, M. (Eds.). (1998). The black-white test score Gap. Washington: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khandwalla, P. N. (1977). The design of organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace, Javanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koberg, C., & Ungson, G. (1987). The effects of uncertainty and dependence on organizational structure and performance: A comparative study. Journal of Management, 13, 725–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraatz, M., & Zajac, E. (2001). How Organizational Resources affect Strategic change and performance in trubulent envrionments: theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(5), 632–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuivaleinen, O., Sundqvist, S., Puumalainen, K., & Cadogan, J. (2004). “The effect of environmental turbulence and leader characteristics on international performance: are knowledge- based firms different? Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 21, 35–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P.R., and J. Lorsch. 1967. Organization and environment. Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.

  • Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). “Product innovation strategy and the performance of new product ventures in china. The Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1123–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, X., & Germain, R. (2003). Organizational structure, context, customer orientation and performance: lessons from Chinese state-owned enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1131–1151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longstaff, P. H. (2005). Security, resilience and communication in the unpredictable environments such as terrorism, natural disasters and complex technology. Boston: Harvard University Program on Information Resources, Policy Research Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, L., Heinrich, C., & Hill, C. (2001). Studying governance and public management: Challenges and Prospects. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 233–261.

  • Mason, R. (2007). The external environment’s effect on management and strategy: a complexity theory approach. Management Decision, 45(1), 10–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (2001). Managerial strategies and behavior in networks: A model with evidence from U.S. public education. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 271–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (2003). Public management and educational performance: The impact of managerial networking. Public Administration Review, 63, 675–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (2005). Managerial networking: Issues of measurement and research design. Administration and Society, 37(5), 523–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. (2008). Management theory and occam’s razor: how public organizations buffer the environment. Administration and Society, 39(8), 931–958.

  • Meier, K. J., O’Toole, L., Boyne, G., & Walker, R. (2006). Strategic management and the performance of public organizations: testing venerable ideas against recent theories. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., O’Toole, L., & Hicklin, A. (2010). I’ve seen fire and I’ve seen rain: public management and performance after a natural disaster. Administration and Society, 41, 979–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melton, E. K., Walker, M., & Walker, S. (2010). “Management strategies and performance: an examination of minority managers in public organizations.” Economics, Management and Financial Markets, 5(3), 131–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company.

    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), 546–571.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Milward, H. B. (1996). Symposium on “The hollow state: capacity, control and performance in interorganizational settings.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 193–313.

  • Milward, H. B., & Provan, K. G. (1993). The hollow state: private provision of public services. In H. Ingram & S. R. Smith (Eds.), Public Policy for Democracy (pp. 222–237). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

  • O’Toole, L. J. (1997). Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and research-based agendas in public administration. Public Administration Review, 57(1), 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, L. J., Jr., & Meier, K. J. (1999). Modeling the impact of public management: Implications of structural context. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9, 505–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, L. J., Jr., & Meier, K. J. (2003). Plus ça change: Public management, personnel stability, and organizational performance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13, 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennings, J. (1992). Structural contingency theory: a reappraisal. Research in Organizational Behavior, 14, 267–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piening, E. (2013). Dynamic capabilities in public organizations. Public Management Review, 15(2), 209–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, D. (2005). Diversity, representation, and performance: Evidence about race and ethnicity in public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 615–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, D., Hawes, D., Hicklin, A., & Melton, E. (2010). Competing drivers of diversity management implementation: evidence from public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(4), 867–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, B., & Reid, G. (2005). “Flexibility, firm-specific turbulence and the performance of the long-lived small firm. Review of Industrial Organization, 26, 415–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainey, H. (2003). Understanding and managing public organizations. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rattsø, J. (1999). Aggregate local public sector investment and shocks: Norway 1946–1990. Applied Economics, 31, 577–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. W. (1981). Organizations: rational, natural and open systems. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1947). Administrative behavior. New York: The Free Press.

  • Smart, C., & Vertinsky, I. (1984). Strategy and the environment: a study of corporate responses to crises. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 199–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C., & Hambrick, D. (1980). Measuring organizational strategies: Some theoretical and methodological problems. Academy of Management Review, 5(4), 527–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starbuck, W. G., Greve, A., & Hedberg, B. (1978). Responding to crisis. Journal of Business Administration, 9, 111–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steers, R. M. (1977). Organizational effectiveness: a behavioral view. Santa Monica: Goodyear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. I. (1987). The process of organizational death: Disbanding and reconnecting. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32, 542–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Termeer, C., & van de Brink, M. (2013). Organizational conditions for dealing with the unknown unknown. Public Management Review, 15(1), 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosi, H., Aldag, R., & Storey, R. (1973). On the measurement of the environment: An assessment of the Lawrence and Lorsch environmental subscale. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18, 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vorhies, D. (1998). An investigation of the factors leading to the development of marketing capabilities and organizational effectiveness. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 6(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenglinsky, H. (1997). How educational expenditures improve student performance and ho w they don’t. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirt, F. M., & Kirst, M. (1997). The political dynamics of American education. Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Withey, S. B. (1962). Reaction to uncertain threat. In G. W. Baker & D. W. Chapman (Eds.), Man and society in disaster (pp. 93–123). New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, R. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Policy, University of Connecticut, 1800 Asylum Avenue, West Hartford, CT, 06117, USA

    Erin K. Melton

Authors
  1. Erin K. Melton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erin K. Melton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Melton, E.K. Testing Turbulence: Exploring the Determinants of Managerial Networking. Public Organiz Rev 17, 19–37 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-015-0324-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-015-0324-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation