Developing a Theory of the Firm for the 21st Century

Academy of Management ReviewVol. 45, No. 4 From The EditorsDeveloping a Theory of the Firm for the 21st CenturySharon A. Alvarez, Udo Zander, Jay B. Barney and Allan AfuahSharon A. AlvarezUniversity of Pittsburgh, Udo ZanderStockholm School of Economics, Jay B. BarneyThe University of Utah and Allan AfuahUniversity of MichiganPublished Online:18 Nov 2020https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2020.0372AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsDownload CitationsAdd to favoritesTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail View articleREFERENCESAdner, R. 2017. Ecosystems as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. Journal of Management, 43: 39–58. Google ScholarAfuah, A., & Tucci, C. 2012. Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review, 37: 355–375.Link , Google ScholarAkerlof, G., & Kranton, R. 2008. Identity, supervision, and work groups. American Economic Review, 98: 212–217. Google ScholarAlchian, A., & Demsetz, H. 1972. Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62: 777–795. Google ScholarAllen, F., Carletti, E., & Marquez, R. 2015. Stakeholder governance, competition, and firm value. Review of Finance, 19: 1315–1346. Google ScholarAlvarez, S., & Barney, J. 2005. How do entrepreneurs organize firms under conditions of uncertainty? Journal of Management, 31: 776–793. Google ScholarAlvarez, S., & Barney, J. 2007. The entrepreneurial theory of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 44: 1057–1063. Google ScholarAlvarez, S., & Porac, P. 2020. Imagination, indeterminacy, and managerial choice at the limit of knowledge. Academy of Management Review. Published online ahead of print. doi: 10.5465/amr.2020.0366 Google ScholarAlvesson, M., & Robertson, M. 2006. The best and the brightest: The construction, significance and effects of elite identities in consulting firms. Organization, 13: 195–224. Google ScholarBandiera, O., Barankay, I., & Rasul, I. 2010. Social incentives in the workplace. Review of Economic Studies, 77: 417–458. Google ScholarBarney, J. 2018. Why resource‐based theory's model of profit appropriation must incorporate a stakeholder perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 3305–3325. Google ScholarBusiness Roundtable. 2019, August 19. "Business Roundtable Redefines the Purpose of a Corporation to Promote 'An Economy That Serves All Americans.'" Retrieved from https://www.businessroundtable.org/business-roundtable-redefines-the-purpose-of-a-corporation-to-promote-an-economy-that-serves-all-americans Google ScholarCoase, R. 1937. The nature of the firm. Economica, 4: 386–405. Google ScholarDemsetz, H. 1991. Comment on "The organization of economic activity." Small Business Economics, 3: 67–69. Google ScholarEllemers, N., De Gilder, D., & Haslam, A. 2004. Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy of Management Review, 29: 459–478.Link , Google ScholarFoss, N., Klein, P., Lien, L., Zellweger, T., & Zenger, T. 2020. Ownership competence. Strategic Management Journal. Published online ahead of print. doi: 10.1002/smj.3222 Google ScholarFoss, N., Lando, H., & Thomsen, S. 2000. The theory of the firm. In B. BouckaertG. de Geest (Eds.), Encyclopedia of law and economics (Vol. 3): 631–658. London, U.K.: Routledge. Google ScholarFrank, M., Autor, D., Bessen, J., Brynjolfsson, E., Cebrian, M., Deming, D., Feldman, M., Groh, M., Lobo, J., Moro, E., Wang, D., Youn, H., & Rahwan, I. 2019. Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116: 6531–6539. Google ScholarFriedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google ScholarGrossman, S., & Hart, O. 1986. The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy, 94: 691–719. Google ScholarHannah, D., & Eisenhardt, K. 2018. How firms navigate cooperation and competition in nascent ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 3163–3192. Google ScholarHart, O. 1989. An economist's perspective on the theory of the firm. Columbia Law Review, 89: 1757–1774. Google ScholarHart, O. 2011. Thinking about the firm: A review of Daniel Spulber's The theory of the firm. Journal of Economic Literature, 49: 101–113. Google ScholarHart, O., & Holmström, B. 2010. A theory of firm scope. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125: 483–513. Google ScholarHart, O., & Moore, J. 1990. Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 98: 1119–1158. Google ScholarHolmström, B., & Milgrom, P. 1994. The firm as an incentive system. American Economic Review, 84: 972–991. Google ScholarHolmström, B., & Tirole, J. 1989. The theory of the firm. In R. SchmalenseeR. D. Willig (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organization (Vol. 1): 61–133. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. Google ScholarHusted, B., & de Jesus Salazar, J. 2006. Taking Friedman seriously: Maximizing profits and social performance. Journal of Management studies, 43: 75–91. Google ScholarJacobides, M., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. 2018. Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 2255–2276. Google ScholarJensen, M. 2002. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12: 235–256. Google ScholarJensen, M., & Meckling, W. 1976. Theory of the firm : Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3: 305–360. Google ScholarKaplan, R., & McMillan, D. 2020. Updating the balanced scorecard for triple bottom line strategies (HBS working paper 21-028). Retrieved from https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/updating-the-balanced-scorecard-for-triple-bottom-line-strategies Google ScholarKnight, F. 1921. Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston, MA: Hart, Schaffer, and Marx. Google ScholarKogut, B. 2000. The network as knowledge: Generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 405–425. Google ScholarKogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3: 383–397. Google ScholarKogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24: 625–645. Google ScholarKogut, B., & Zander, U. 1996. What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7: 502–518. Google ScholarMilgrom, P., & Roberts, J. 1988. Economic theories of the firm: Past, present, and future. Canadian Journal of Economics, 21: 444–458. Google ScholarNaim, M., & Lenka, U. 2018. Development and retention of Generation Y employees: A conceptual framework. Employee Relations, 40: 433–455. Google ScholarNelson, R., & Winter, S. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google ScholarPenrose, E. 1959. The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell. Google ScholarPeterson, S., & Luthans, F. 2006. The impact of financial and nonfinancial incentives on business-unit outcomes over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 156–165. Google ScholarRadner, R. 1996. Bounded rationality, indeterminacy, and the theory of the firm. Economic Journal, 106: 1360–1373. Google ScholarTate, J. 2006. Ownership and possession in the early common law. American Journal of Legal History, 48: 280–313. Google ScholarWaldron, J. 2020. Property and ownership. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2020 ed.). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/property Google ScholarWilliamson, O. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York, NY: Free Press. Google ScholarWilliamson, O. 1985. The Institutions of capitalism. New York, NY: Free Press. Google ScholarWilliamson, O. 1991. Strategizing, economizing, and economic organization. Strategic Management Journal, 12: 75–94. Google ScholarWinter, S. 1988. On Coase, competence, and the corporation. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 4: 163–180. Google ScholarYoshimori, M. 1995. Whose company is it? The concept of the corporation in Japan and the West. Long Range Planning, 28: 33–44. Google ScholarZander, U., & Kogut, B. 1995. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6: 76–92. Google ScholarZander, U., & Zander, L. 2010. Opening the grey box: Social communities, knowledge and culture in acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 41: 27–37. Google ScholarZander, U., Zander, L., & Yildiz, E. 2012. Building competitive advantage in international acquisitions: Grey box conditions, culture, status and meritocracy. In A. VerbekeH. Merchant (Eds.), Handbook of research on international strategic management: 211–237. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar Publishing. Google ScholarZingales, L. 2000. In search of new foundations. Journal of Finance, 55: 1623–1653. Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byContinue the Story or Turn the Page? Coworker Reactions to Inheriting a LegacyJason A. Colquitt, Tyler B. Sabey, Michael D. Pfarrer, Jessica B. Rodell and Edwyna T. Hill11 January 2023 | Academy of Management Review, Vol. 48, No. 1Rethinking Corporate Power to Tackle Grand Societal Challenges: Lessons from Political PhilosophyRuth V. Aguilera, J. Alberto Aragón-Correa and Valentina Marano12 October 2022 | Academy of Management Review, Vol. 47, No. 4Open Team Production, the New Cooperative Firm, and Hybrid AdvantageMarco Berti and Christos Pitelis20 April 2022 | Academy of Management Review, Vol. 47, No. 2 Vol. 45, No. 4 Permissions Metrics in the past 12 months History Published online 18 November 2020 Published in print 1 October 2020 Information© Academy of Management ReviewDownload PDF