Abstract:This article applies and extends the three‐part organizational framework used in the preceding article to a broad range of management innovations. After furnishing some interesting evidence of the rise and fall of management techniques such as TQM, Reengineering, Just‐in‐Time Production, and Activity‐Based Costing, the authors raise and then attempt to answer a number of questions: What explains the popularity of these management innovations? Why do they often fail to produce the expected benefits? How can managers tell if a particular technique is right for them? What can managers do to increase the likelihood that an adopted technique will be successful? The persistent, and at times seemingly insatiable, corporate demand for management innovations is viewed by the authors as a “rational” economic response by senior managers to major changes in the external business environment—changes that in turn dictate changes in business strategy. For example, when confronted with external changes such as deregulation or heightened global competition, companies often find it necessary to refocus their efforts on improving product quality and operating efficiency. And such changes in business strategy tend to require a revamping of the three critical components of organizational architecture: (1) assignment of decision rights, (2) performance evaluation systems, and (3) compensation systems. As the authors argue, innovations such as TQM, outsourcing, Re‐engineering, and JIT typically involve major changes in just one or two of these critical elements of the organization, but not all three. The failure to coordinate organizational changes in such a way that these three elements are mutually consistent and reinforcing is one important reason why management innovations can fail to meet expectations. The framework described in this article is designed to help managers considering one potentially valuable set of organizational changes to identify other facets of the organization that also require attention and perhaps complementary adjustments.

Why a management concept fails to support managers’ work: The case of the ‘core competence of a corporation’

What Theories Are Needed for Strategic Management?

Core Competence of Corporation: A Literature Review

Knowledge management routines as a source of organisational inertia: the case of Japanese corporate restructuring

Capitalism and Management Research: The Worst of Times, The Best of Times

Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Team Model for Simultaneously Exploring and Exploiting

Managing Corporate Sustainability and CSR: A Conceptual Framework Combining Values, Strategies and Instruments Contributing to Sustainable Development

Conceptual Connotation and Theoretical Framework of Enterprise Relative Core Competence

Collapse of Better Place: A Managerial Cognition Perspective on the Failure of an Entrepreneurial Initiative

A New Framework Of Core Competence Of Corporation: Hierarchy System Model

Theory, explanation, and understanding in management research

The hegemonic ambiguity of big concepts in organization studies

Big Data, Proxies, Algorithmic Decision‐Making and the Future of Management Theory

The Complexity of Corporate Culture as a Potential Source of Firm Profit Differentials

The Freedom–Responsibility Nexus in Management Philosophy and Business Ethics

Knowledge management and the practice of knowledge sharing and learning at work: a case study

Why does Faithful Epistemic Representation Matter for Management Practices? The Case of the Natural Environment in Management Theory

Management's Worldview: Four Critical Points about Reality, Language, and Knowledge Building to Improve Organization Performance

Core competence for sustainable competitive advantage: a structured methodology for identifying core competence

MANAGEMENT FADS AND ORGANIZATIONAL ARCHITECTURE