STRATEGIC POSITIONING OR INSTITUTIONAL COERCION? THE STRUCTURE OF GOVERNING BOARDS
STRATEGIC POSITIONING OR INSTITUTIONAL COERCION? THE STRUCTURE OF GOVERNING BOARDS
复制标题
战略定位还是制度强制？
DOI：
10.1108/eb028795
复制
发表时间：
1993
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. O. Ginn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Beekun;G. O. Ginn
战略管理的观点建议，各组织的理事会结构应与组织的战略目标相辅相成。相反，制度化的观点认为，组织结构的管理委员会，以应对其任务环境中的制度压力。无论从哪一个角度来看，理事会的三个结构方面预计将受到影响：规模、组成的多样性和医务人员的代表性。进行了一项研究，涉及急性护理医院的机构要求和战略，其董事会的结构特点。结果表明，控制后的组织规模和成员在一个多医院系统，109急性护理医院的董事会结构显着不同的功能，他们的整体业务战略和机构联系的功能。然而，在董事会结构的总方差中，战略变量所占的比例大约是制度变量所占比例的两倍。
The strategic management perspective suggests that organizations structure their governing boards to complement the strategic goals of the organization. In contrast, the institutionalization perspective holds that organizations structure their governing boards to respond to institutional pressures in their task environment. Regardless of which perspective is followed, three structural dimensions of governing boards are expected to be affected: size, diversity of composition, and medical staff representation. A study was conducted to relate the institutional requirements and strategies of acute care hospitals to the structural characteristics of their boards of directors. Results indicated that, after controlling for organizational size and membership in a multihospital system, the governing board structure of 109 acute care hospitals varied significantly both as a function of their overall business strategy and as a function of institutional linkages. However, the proportion of the total variance in board structure accounted for by strategy variables was approximately twice as much as that accounted for by institutional variables.