Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-cf9d5c678-cnwzk Total loading time: 1.139 Render date: 2021-08-04T23:02:21.996Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

How does opportunistic behavior influence firm size? An evolutionary approach to organizational behavior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2010

Abstract:

This paper relates firm size and opportunism by showing that, given certain behavioural dispositions of humans, the size of a profit-maximizing firm can be determined by cognitive aspects underlying firm-internal cultural transmission processes. We argue that what firms do better than markets – besides economizing on transaction costs – is to establish a cooperative regime among its employees that keeps in check opportunism. A model depicts the outstanding role of the entrepreneur or business leader in firm-internal socialization processes and the evolution of corporate cultures. We show that high opportunism-related costs are a reason for keeping firms’ size small.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The JOIE Foundation 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrow, K. J. (1974), The Limits of Organization, New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Alchian, A. A. and Demsetz, H. (1972), ‘Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization’, American Economic Review, 62 (5): 777795.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (2000), Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, New York: Worth.Google Scholar
Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., and Akert, R. M. (2002), Social Psychology, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Audretsch, D. B. (1997), ‘Technological Regimes, Industrial Demography and the Evolution of Industrial Structures’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 6 (1): 4982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, A. B. and Schaufeli, W. B. (2008), ‘Positive Organizational Behavior: Engaged Employees in Flourishing Organizations’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29 (2): 147154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, J. N and Hannan, M. T. (2002), ‘Organizational Blueprints for Success in High-Tech Start-Ups’, California Management Review, 44 (3): 836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berson, Y., Oreg, S., and Dvir, T. (2008), ‘CEO Values, Organizational Culture and Firm Outcomes’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29 (5): 615633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, G. E. and Ockenfels, A. (2000), ‘ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition’, American Economic Review, 90 (1): 166193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, S. and Gintis, H. (2004), ‘Persistent Parochialism: Trust and Exclusion in Ethnic Networks’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 55 (1): 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1980), ‘Sociobiology, Culture and Economic Theory’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1 (2): 97121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1982), ‘Cultural Transmission and the Evolution of Cooperative Behavior’, Human Ecology, 10 (3): 325351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1985), Culture and the Evolutionary Process, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1989), ‘Social Learning as an Adaptation’, Lectures on Mathematics in the Life Sciences, 20: 120.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1993), ‘Rationality, Imitation, and Tradition’, Day, R. H. and Chen, P. (eds.), Nonlinear Dynamics and Evolutionary Economics, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 131149.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (2002), ‘Group Beneficial Norms Can Spread Rapidly in a Structured Population’, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 215 (3): 287296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, R. and Hodgson, G. M. (2006), ‘The Impact of Empirical Tests of Transaction Cost Economics on the Debate on the Nature of the Firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 27 (5): 461476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Churchill, N. C. and Lewis, V. L. (1983), ‘The Five Stages of Small Business Growth’, Harvard Business Review, 61 (3): 3050.Google Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1937), ‘The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, 4 (16): 386405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1988), The Firm, the Market, and the Law, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Coase, R. H. (1992), ‘The Institutional Structure of Production’, American Economic Review, 82 (4): 713719.Google Scholar
Conner, K. R. and Prahalad, C. K. (1996), ‘A Resource-based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism’, Organization Science, 7 (5): 477501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cordes, C., Richerson, P. J., McElreath, R., and Strimling, P. (2008), ‘A Naturalistic Approach to the Theory of the Firm; The Role of Cooperation and Cultural Evolution’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68 (1): 125139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1992), A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dosi, G. and Marengo, L. (2007), ‘On the Evolutionary and Behavioral Theories of Organizations: A Tentative Roadmap’, Organization Science, 18 (3): 491502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enzle, M. E. and Anderson, S. C. (1993), ‘Surveillant Intentions and Intrinsic Motivation’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (2): 257266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eshel, I., Samuelson, L., and Shaked, A. (1998), ‘Altruists, Egoists, and Hooligans in a Local Interaction Model’, American Economic Review, 88 (1): 157179.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. and Gächter, S. (2000), ‘Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments’, American Economic Review, 90 (4): 980994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, A. J. (2007), ‘Beyond Foraging: Behavioral Science and the Future of Institutional Economics’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 3 (3): 265291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foss, N. J. (1996), ‘Knowledge-based Approaches to the Theory of the Firm: Some Critical Comments’, Organization Science, 7 (5): 470476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foss, N. J. (2000), ‘The Theory of the Firm: An Introduction to Themes and Contributions’, Foss, N. J. (ed.), The Theory of the Firm: Critical Perspectives on Business and Management, London: Routledge, pp. xvlxi.Google Scholar
Frey, B. S. and Jegen, R. (2001), ‘Motivation Crowding Theory: A Survey of Empirical Evidence’, Journal of Economic Surveys, 15 (5): 589611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghoshal, S. and Moran, P. (1996), ‘Bad for Practice: A Critique of the Transaction Cost Theory’, Academy of Management Review, 21 (1): 1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gindis, D. (2009), ‘From Fictions and Aggregates to Real Entities in the Theory of the Firm’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 5 (1): 2546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greiner, L. E. (1998), ‘Evolution and Revolution as Organizations Grow’, Harvard Business Review, 76 (3): 5567.Google ScholarPubMed
Güth, W. and van Damme, E. (1998), ‘Information, Strategic Behavior, and Fairness in Ultimatum Bargaining: An Experimental Study’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 42 (2–3): 227247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, J. E. Jr. (1999), ‘Rigidity of Social Systems’, Journal of Political Economy, 107 (1): 4064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, O. (1995), Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure, Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, A. S., Platow, M. J., Turner, J. C., Reynolds, K. J., McGarty, C., Oakes, P. J., Johnson, S., Ryan, M. K. and Veenstra, K. (2001), ‘Social Identity and the Romance of Leadership: The Importance of being Seen to be ‘Doing it for Us’, Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 4 (3): 191205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. (2004), ‘Cultural Group Selection, Coevolutionary Processes and Large-scale Cooperation’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 53 (1): 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. and Gil-White, F. J. (2001), ‘The Evolution of Prestige: Freely Conferred Deference as a Mechanism for Enhancing the Benefits of Cultural Transmission’, Evolution and Human Behavior, 22 (3): 165196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, C. W. (1990), ‘Cooperation, Opportunism, and the Invisible Hand: Implications for Transaction Cost Theory’, Academy of Management Review, 15 (3): 500513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2004), ‘Opportunism is Not the Only Reason Why Firms Exist: Why an Explanatory Emphasis on Opportunism May Mislead Management Strategy’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 13 (2): 401418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. and Knudsen, T. (2007), ‘Firm-Specific Learning and the Nature of the Firm: Why Transaction Costs May Provide an Incomplete Explanation’, Revue Economique, 58 (2): 331350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmstrom, B. R. and Milgrom, P. (1994), ‘The Firm as an Incentive System’, American Economic Review, 84 (4): 972991.Google Scholar
Holmstrom, B. R. and Tirole, J. (1989), ‘The Theory of the Firm’, Schmalensee, R. and Willig, R. D. (eds.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, Volume 1, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 61133.Google Scholar
Kameda, T. and Diasuke, N. (2002), ‘Cost–benefit Analysis of Social/Cultural Learning in a Nonstationary Uncertain Environment: An Evolutionary Simulation and an Experiment with Human Subjects’, Evolution and Human Behavior, 23 (5): 373393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1996), ‘What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning’, Organization Science, 7 (5): 502518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992), ‘Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology’, Organization Science, 3 (3): 383397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreps, D. M. (1990), ‘Corporate Culture and Economic Theory’, Alt, J. L. and Shepsle, K. (eds.), Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, Cambrdige: Cambridge University Press, pp. 90143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1994), Principles of Linguistic Change: Internal Factors, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (2001), Principles of Linguistic Change: Social Factors, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Langlois, R. N. (1998), ‘Personal Capitalism as Charismatic Authority: The Organizational Economics of a Weberian Concept’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 7 (1): 195213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, R. N. (2003), ‘Cognitive Comparative Advantage and the Organization of Work: Lessons from Herbert Simon's Vision of the Future’, Journal of Economic Psychology, 24 (2): 167187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lumsden, C. J. and Wilson, E. O. (1981), Genes, Mind, and Culture, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Madhok, A. (1996), ‘Crossroads – The Organization of Economic Activity: Transaction Costs, Firm Capabilities, and the Nature of Governance’, Organization Science, 7 (5): 577590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nicholson, N. (1997), ‘Evolutionary Psychology: Toward a New View of Human Nature and Organizational Society’, Human Relations, 50 (9): 10531078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, N. and White, R. (2006), ‘Darwinism – A New Paradigm for Organizational Behavior?’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27 (2): 111119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagano, U. (1999), ‘Is Power an Economic Good?’, Bowles, S., Franzini, M., and Pagano, U. (eds.), The Politics and Economics of Power, London: Routledge, pp. 6384.Google Scholar
Parkhe, A. (1993), ‘Strategic Alliance Structuring: A Game Theoretic and Transaction Cost Examination of Interfirm Cooperation’, Academy of Management Journal, 36 (4): 794829.Google Scholar
Penrose, E. T. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, London: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Reinstaller, A. (2007), ‘The Division of Labor in the Firm: Agency, Near-Decomposability and the Babbage Principle’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 3 (3): 293322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richerson, P. J. and Boyd, R. (2001), ‘The Evolution of Subjective Commitment to Groups: A Tribal Instincts Theory’, in Nesse, R. M. (ed.), Evolution and the Capacity for Commitment, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 186220.Google Scholar
Richerson, P. J. and Boyd, R. (2005), Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Richerson, P. J., Collins, D., and Genet, R. M. (2006), ‘Why Managers Need an Evolutionary Theory of Organizations’, Strategic Organization, 4 (2): 201211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1983), Diffusion of Innovations, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rubin, P. H. (1982), ‘Evolved Ethics and Efficient Ethics’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3 (2–3): 161174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salancik, G. R. and Pfeffer, J. (1978), ‘A Social Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task Design’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 23 (2): 224253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schilling, M. A. and Steensma, K. H. (2002), ‘Disentangling the Theories of Firm Boundaries: A Path Model and Empirical Test’, Organization Science, 13 (4): 387401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1955), ‘A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69 (1): 99118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajfel, H. (1982), ‘Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations’, Annual Review of Psychology, 33: 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1996), ‘Do Apes Ape?’, in Heyes, C. M. and Galef, B. G. Jr. (eds.), Social Learning in Animals: The Roots of Culture, San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 319346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1971), ‘The Vertical Integration of Production: Market Failure Considerations’, American Economic Review, 61 (2): 112123.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1979), ‘Transaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations’, Journal of Law and Economics, 22 (2): 233261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1981), ‘The Modern Corporation: Origins, Evolution, Attributes’, Journal of Economic Literature, 19 (4): 15371568.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1985), The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1999), ‘Strategy Research: Governance and Competence Perspectives’, Strategic Management Journal, 20 (12): 10871108.3.0.CO;2-Z>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (2002), ‘The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16 (3): 171195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, U. (1998), ‘Imagination and Leadership – The Neglected Dimension of an Evolutionary Theory of the Firm’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 35 (2): 161177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, U. (2000), ‘Changing Cognitive Frames – Changing Organizational Forms: An Entrepreneurial Theory of Organizational Development’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 9 (4): 733755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, U. (2007), ‘Firms as Realizations of Entrepreneurial Visions’, Journal of Management Studies, 44 (7): 11251140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zenger, T. R. and Hesterly, W. S. (1997), ‘The Disaggregation of Corporations: Selective Intervention, High-powered Incentives, and Molecular Units’, Organization Science, 8 (3): 209222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

How does opportunistic behavior influence firm size? An evolutionary approach to organizational behavior
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

How does opportunistic behavior influence firm size? An evolutionary approach to organizational behavior
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

How does opportunistic behavior influence firm size? An evolutionary approach to organizational behavior
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *