Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors introduce the idea of sequential complementarity, when deploying a control mechanism enhances marginal returns from increasing a temporally preceding one within a control portfolio to explain those interactions.

TL;DR: In this article, a comparative case study is employed to examine how developers in multinational hotel corporations select hotel projects when implementing expansion strategies, finding that a trade-off between control costs and control benefits determines the success of project selection for expansion.

TL;DR: In this paper, a study of engineers who develop technology for telecommunication, the authors stress the importance of observing operative work when trying to create an understanding of the dynamics of organizational control.

TL;DR: It is shown that contractual incentives tied to quality are generally associated with a higher quality of output and the use of process-level inter-organizational information systems also has a positive impact on the output quality of offshore BPO providers.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develop an alternative model, called prospect theory, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights.

TL;DR: Prospect Theory as mentioned in this paper is an alternative theory of individual decision making under risk, developed for simple prospects with monetary outcomes and stated probabilities, in which value is given to gains and losses (i.e., changes in wealth or welfare) rather than to final assets, and probabilities are replaced by decision weights.

Abstract: 1. The integrated wholeness of the organism must be one of the foundation stones of motivation theory. 2. The hunger drive (or any other physiological drive) was rejected as a centering point or model for a definitive theory of motivation. Any drive that is somatically based and localizable was shown to be atypical rather than typical in human motivation. 3. Such a theory should stress and center itself upon ultimate or basic goals rather than partial or superficial ones, upon ends rather than means to these ends. Such a stress would imply a more central place for unconscious than for conscious motivations. 4. There are usually available various cultural paths to the same goal. Therefore conscious, specific, local-cultural desires are not as fundamental in motivation theory as the more basic, unconscious goals. 5. Any motivated behavior, either preparatory or consummatory, must be understood to be a channel through which many basic needs may be simultaneously expressed or satisfied. Typically an act has more than one motivation. 6. Practically all organismic states are to be understood as motivated and as motivating. 7. Human needs arrange themselves in hierarchies of prepotency. That is to say, the appearance of one need usually rests on the prior satisfaction of another, more pre-potent need. Man is a perpetually wanting animal. Also no need or drive can be treated as if it were isolated or discrete; every drive is related to the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of other drives. 8. Lists of drives will get us nowhere for various theoretical and practical reasons. Furthermore any classification of motivations

TL;DR: This transmutability of the validation matrix argues for the comparisons within the heteromethod block as the most generally relevant validation data, and illustrates the potential interchangeability of trait and method components.