Advertisement

Resource Dependence Theory

  • Rafael Biermann
  • Michael Harsch
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter aims to make resource dependence theory (RDT) more accessible for scholars of international organizations. It first outlines RDT’s origins and evolution, introduces its core assumptions, and discusses the theory’s shortcomings. RDT is currently experiencing a phase of theory revival, refinement, and empirical application. Secondly the chapter explores whether RDT can be applied to international organizations and considers works by International Relations (IR) scholars who have employed a resource dependence perspective. Increasing empirical evidence indicates that RDT has the potential to improve our understanding of cooperation among international organizations. Open questions remain about RDT’s scope and its compatibility with other organizational and IR theories. The chapter concludes by suggesting several avenues for future research.

Keywords

External Resource Resource Dependence Social Exchange Theory Resource Dependence Theory International Relation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

  1. Aldrich, H. E. (1976). Resource Dependence and Interorganizational Relations: Local Employment Services Offices and Social Services Sector Organizations. Administration & Society, 7(4), 419–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich, H. E., & Pfeffer, J. (1976). Environments of Organizations. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 79–105.Google Scholar
  3. Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and Environments. Englewood-Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Aldrich, H. E., & Whetten, D. A. (1981). Organization-Sets, Action-Sets, and Networks: Making the Most of Simplicity. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Design (Vol. 1, pp. 385–408). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Barnett, M., & Coleman, L. (2005). Designing Police: Interpol and the Study of Change in International Organizations. International Studies Quarterly, 49(4), 593–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (Eds.) (2005). Power in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Barrett, S. (2007). Why Cooperate? The Incentive to Supply Global Public Goods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.Google Scholar
  9. Benson, J. K. (1975). The Interorganizational Network as a Political Economy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(2), 229–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Biermann, R. (2008). Towards a Theory of Inter-Organizational Networking. The Euro-Atlantic Security Institutions Interacting. The Review of International Organizations, 3(2), 151–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biermann, R. (2011). Inter-Organizational Relations: An Emerging Research Program. In B. Reinalda (Ed.), The Ashgate Research Companion to Non-State Actors (pp. 173–184). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  12. Biermann, R. (2014). NATO’s Troubled Relations with Partner Organizations. A Resource Dependence Explanation. In S. Mayer (Ed.), NATO’s Post-Cold Bureaucracy and the Changing Provision of Security (pp. 215–234). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Brass, D. J. (2002). Intraorganizational Power and Dependence. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Organizations (pp. 138–157). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Brechin, S. R., & Ness, G. D. (2013). Looking Back at the Gap: International Organizations as Organizations Twenty-Five Years Later. Journal of International Organization Studies, 4(2), 14–39.Google Scholar
  16. Brosig, M. (2011). Overlap and Interplay between International Organisations: Theories and Approaches. South African Journal of International Affairs, 18(2), 147–167.Google Scholar
  17. Brosig, M. (2015). Cooperative Peacekeeping in Africa: Exploring Regime Complexity. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Casciaro, T., & Piskorski, M. J. (2005). Power Imbalance, Mutual Dependence, and Constraint Absorption: A Closer Look at Resource Dependence Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(2), 167–199.Google Scholar
  19. Cook, K. S. (1977). Exchange and Power in Networks of Interorganizational Relations. The Sociological Quarterly, 18(1), 62–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davis, G. F., & Cobb, J. A. (2010). Resource Dependence Theory: Past and Future. In C. B. Schoonhoven & F. Dobbin (Eds.), Stanford’s Organization Theory Renaissance 1970–2000 (pp. 21–42). Bingley: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
  21. Dingwerth, K., Kerwer, D., & Nölke, A. (Eds.) (2009). Die Organisierte Welt. Internationale Beziehungen und Organisationsforschung. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  22. Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational Legitimacy. Social Values and Organizational Behavior. The Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122–136.Google Scholar
  23. Drees, J. M., & Heugens, P. P. (2013). Synthesizing and Extending Resource Dependence Theory: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Management, 20(10), 1–33.Google Scholar
  24. Ellis, D. C. (2010). The Organizational Turn in International Organization Theory. Journal of International Organization Studies, 1(1), 11–28.Google Scholar
  25. Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-Dependence Relations. American Sociological Review, 27(1), 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Emerson, R. M. (1964). Power-Dependence Relations: Two Experiments. Sociometry, 27(3), 282–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Emerson, R. M. (1972a). Exchange Theory, Part I: A Psychological Basis for Social Exchange. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological Theories in Progress (Vol. 2, pp. 38–57). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  28. Emerson, R. M. (1972b). Exchange Theory, Part II: Exchange Relations and Network Structures. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological Theories in Progress (Vol. 2, pp. 58–87). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  29. Etzioni, A. (1960). New Directions in the Study of Organizations and Society. Social Research, 27(2), 223–228.Google Scholar
  30. Gargiulo, M. (1993). Two-Step Leverage: Managing Constraint in Organizational Politics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Galaskiewicz, J. (1985). Interorganizational Relations. Annual Review of Sociology, 11, 281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gest, N., & Grigorescu, A. (2010). Interactions among Intergovernmental Organizations in the Anti-Corruption Realm. The Review of International Organizations, 5(1), 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.Google Scholar
  34. Harsch, M. F. (2015). The Power of Dependence: NATO-UN Cooperation in Crisis Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hatch, M. J. (1997). Organization Theory. Modern, Symbolic, and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Heisbourg, F. (2000). European Defence. Making It Work, Chaillot Paper 42, Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.Google Scholar
  37. Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., & Collins, B. J. (2009). Resource Dependence Theory: A Review. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1404–1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Huxham, C., & Beech, N. (2010). Inter-Organizational Power. In S. Cropper, M. Ebers, C. Huxham, & P. Smith Ring (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Inter-Organizational Relations (pp. 555–579). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Jacobs, D. (1974). Dependency and Vulnerability: An Exchange Approach to the Control of Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(1), 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Katila, R., Rosenberger, J. D., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2008). Swimming with Sharks: Technology Ventures, Defense Mechanisms, and Corporate Relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 295–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  42. Khandwalla, R. N. (1981). Properties of Competing Organizations. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Design (Vol. 1, pp. 409–432). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Koch, M. (2006). Processes of Autonomization in/of International Organizations? The Case of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Working Paper Series, Bielefeld: Institut für Weltgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  44. Levine, S., & White, P. E. (1961). Exchange as a Conceptual Framework for the Study of Interorganizational Relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 5(4), 583–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Liese, A. (2009). Die unterschiedlich starke Öffnung internationaler Organisationen gegenüber nichtstaatlichen Akteuren. Erklärungen der Institutionen- und Organisationstheorie. In K. Dingwerth, D. Kerwer, & A. Nölke (Eds.), Die Organisierte Welt. Internationale Beziehungen und Organisationsforschung (pp. 189–210). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  46. Liese, A. (2010). Explaining Varying Degrees of Openness in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). In C. Jönsson & J. Tallberg (Eds.), Transnational Actors in Global Governance: Patterns, Explanations and Implications (pp. 88–108). Houndmills: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lipson, M. (2011). A Resource Dependence Model of Peace Operations Coordination, Paper presented at the 6th European Consortium for Political Research General Conference, Reykjavík, 25-27 August.Google Scholar
  48. March, J. G. (1966). The Power of Power. In D. Easton (Ed.), Varieties of Political Theory (pp. 39–60). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  49. Mayntz, R. (2009). Prolog. In K. Dingwerth, D. Kerwer, & A. Nölke (Eds.), Die Organisierte Welt. Internationale Beziehungen und Organisationsforschung (pp. 9–11). Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mizruchi, M. S., & Yoo, M. (2002). Interorganizational Power and Dependence. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Organizations (pp. 599–620). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  51. Ness, G. D., & Brechin, S. R. (1988). Bridging the Gap: International Organizations as Organizations. International Organization, 42(2), 245–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants of Interorganizational Relationships: Integration and Future Directions. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 241–265.Google Scholar
  53. Oliver, C. (1991). Network Relations and Loss of Organizational Autonomy. Human Relations, 44(9), 943–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paris, R. (2009). Understanding the “Coordination Problem” in Postwar Statebuilding. In R. Paris & T. D. Sisk (Eds.), The Dilemmas of Statebuilding: Confronting the Contradictions of Postwar Peace Operations (pp. 53–78). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Pfeffer, J. (2003). ‘Introduction to the Classic Edition’. In J. Pfeffer & G. R. Salancik (Eds.), The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (pp. xi–xxix). Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
  56. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1974). Organizational Decision Making as a Political Process: The Case of a University Budget. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(2), 135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2 online ed.Google Scholar
  58. Podolny, J. M. (1993). A Status-Based Model of Market Competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98(4), 829–872.Google Scholar
  59. Provan, K. G., Beyer, J. M., & Kruytbosch, C. (1980). Environmental Linkages and Power in Resource-Dependence Relations between Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2), 200–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1974). The Bases and Use of Power in Organizational Decision Making: The Case of a University. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(4), 453–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Salancik, G. R., Pfeffer, J., & Kelley, J. P. (1978). A Contingency Model of Influence in Organizational Decision-Making. The Pacific Sociological Review, 21(2), 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schäferhoff, M. (2009). Kooperation oder Konkurrenz? Zur Kooperationsbereitschaft internationaler Verwaltungsstäbe in transnationalen öffentlich-privaten Partnerschaften. In K. Dingwerth, D. Kerwer, & A. Nölke (Eds.), Die Organisierte Welt. Internationale Beziehungen und Organisationsforschung (pp. 208–228). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  63. Scott, W. R. (2003). Organizations. Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 5th ed.Google Scholar
  64. Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organization. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  65. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  66. Thompson, J. D., & McEwen, W. J. (1958). Organizational Goals and Environment: Goal-Setting as an Interaction Process. American Sociological Review, 23(1), 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ulrich, D., & Barney, J. B. (1984). Perspectives in Organizations: Resource Dependence, Efficiency, and Population. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 471–481.Google Scholar
  68. Van de Ven, A. H. (1976). On the Nature, Formation, and Maintenance of Relations Among Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 1(4), 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Van de Ven, A. H., & Walker, G. (1984). The Dynamics of Interorganizational Coordination. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 598–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yuchtman, E., & Seashore, S. E. (1967). A System Resource Approach to Organizational Effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32(6), 891–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafael Biermann
    • 1
  • Michael Harsch
    • 2
  1. 1.Friedrich Schiller UniversityJenaGermany
  2. 2.New York University Abu DhabiAbu DhabiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations