Abstract
Purpose: The review summarizes major research that contributed to the organizational life cycle theory, discusses major issues and contradictions of the theory and offers additional assumptions about the organizational life cycle. Based on that, it attempts to offer a future research agenda for the theory.
Methodology/Approach: The paper uses narrative review; the list of included life cycle models stems from previous summaries of the theory and subsequent snowball search through reference lists of individual reviewed papers.
Findings: The theory is rich with various life cycle models that nevertheless converge on some major characteristics. Organizational life cycle can be described with classical five stages: (i) founding, (ii) growth, (iii) maturity, (iv) decline, and (v) revival. However, the stages do not necessarily follow in such an order, and therefore the research establishes likely paths in their development. Also, it appears that growth rate (relative to a market) and change in formalism are major factors distinguishing in the theory individual stages.
Research Limitation/implication: Organizational life cycle theory is often neglected based on simplifying presumptions like determinism of organizational development. On the other hand, there is a growing evidence that factors stemming from particular life cycle stages alter organizational behavior and therefore should be considered in behavioral research on an organizational level.
Originality/Value of paper: The paper represents up to date review of major theoretical models from the perspective of the current state of the field. Since the theory flourished in 70’s and 80’s it is inevitably limited in some aspects. The new review may spark renewed interest in implications stemming from the theory and enrich analytical tools of management scholars.
Full text article
References
Adizes, I., 1979. Organizational passages: Diagnosing and treating lifecycle problems of organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 8(1), pp.3-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(79)90001-9.
Bellone, F., Musso, P., Nesta, L. and Quéré, M., 2008. Market selection along the firm life cycle. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17(4), pp.753-777. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtn025.
Brunninge, O., Nordqvist, M. and Wiklund, J., 2007. Corporate governance and strategic change in SMEs: The effects of ownership, board composition and top management teams. Small Business Economics, 29(3), pp.295-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9021-2.
Burkart, M., Panunzi, F. and Shleifer, A., 2003. Family firms. The Journal of Finance, 58(5), pp.2167-2201. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00601.
Churchill, N.C. and Lewis, V.L., 1983. The five stages of small business growth. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), p.30-50.
Dodge, H.R. and Robbins, J.E., 1992. An empirical investigation of the organizational life cycle. Journal of Small Business Management, 30(1), pp.27-37. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218495897000247.
Downs, A., 1967. Inside Bureaucracy: A RAND Corporation Research Study. Long Grove: Waveland Press.
Drazin, R. and Kazanjian, R.K., 1990. A reanalysis of Miller and Friesen’s life cycle data. Strategic Management Journal, 11(4), pp.319-325. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250110407.
Dufour, Y., Steane, P. and Corriveau, A.M., 2018. From the organizational life-cycle to “ecocycle”: a configurational approach to strategic thinking. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 10(2-3), pp.171-183. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJBA-05-2018-0095.
Flamholtz, E.G., 1990. Toward a holistic model of organizational effectiveness and organizational development at different stages of growth. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 1(2), pp.109-127.
Flamholtz, E.G., 1995. Managing organizational transitions: Implications for corporate and human resource management. European Management Journal, 13(1), pp.39-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-2373(94)00056-D.
Gaibraith, J., 1982. The stages of growth. Journal of Business Strategy, 3(1), pp.70-79. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb038958.
Gray, B., and Ariss, S.S., 1985. Politics and strategic change across organizational life cycles. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), pp.707-723. https://doi.org/10.2307/258040.
Greiner, L.E., 1972. Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, 50(4), pp.37-46.
Hanks, S.H., 1990. The organization life cycle: Integrating content and process. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 1(1), pp.1-12.
Hanks, S.H., Watson, C.J., Jansen, E. and Chandler, G.N., 1994. Tightening the life-cycle construct: A taxonomic study of growth stage configurations in high-technology organizations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(2), pp.5-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401800201.
Hellweg, S. and Canals, L.M., 2014. Emerging approaches, challenges and opportunities in life cycle assessment. Science, 344(6188), pp.1109-1113. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1248361.
Jawahar, I.M. and McLaughlin, G.L., 2001. Toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: An organizational life cycle approach. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), pp.397-414. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4845803.
Katz, D. and Kahn, R.L., 1978. The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: Wiley.
Kazanjian, R.K., 1988. Relation of dominant problems to stages of growth in technology-based new ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), pp.257-279. https://doi.org/10.5465/256548.
Kimberly, J.R., 1979. Issues in the creation of organizations: Initiation, innovation, and institutionalization. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), pp.437-457. https://doi.org/10.5465/255737.
La Rocca, M., La Rocca, T. and Cariola, A., 2011. Capital structure decisions during a firm’s life cycle. Small Business Economics, 37(1), pp.107-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9229-z.
Lester, D.L., Parnell, J.A. and Carraher, S., 2003. Organizational life cycle: A five-stage empirical scale. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(4), pp.339-354. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028979.
Lippitt, G.L. and Schmidt, W.H., 1967. Crises in a developing organization. Harvard Business Review, 45(6), pp.102-112.
Lyden, F.J., 1975. Using Parsons’ functional analysis in the study of public organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20(1), pp.59-70. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392123.
Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H., 1984. A longitudinal study of the corporate life cycle. Management Science, 30(10), pp.1161-1183. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.10.1161.
Mintzberg, H., 1984. Power and organization life cycles. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), pp.207-224. https://doi.org/10.5465/ amr.1984.4277632.
Powell, T.C., Lovallo, D. and Fox, C.R., 2011. Behavioral strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), pp.1369-1386. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.968.
Quinn, R.E. and Cameron, K., 1983. Organizational life cycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence. Management Science, 29(1), pp.33-51. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.1.33.
Scott, B.R., 1971. Stages of Corporate Development. Cambridge: Harvard Business School.
Scott, M. and Bruce, R., 1987. Five stages of growth in small business. Long Range Planning, 20(3), pp.45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(87)90071-9.
Smith, K.G., Mitchell, T.R. and Summer, C.E., 1985. Top level management priorities in different stages of the organizational life cycle. Academy of Management Journal, 28(4), pp.799-820. https://doi.org/10.5465/256238.
Torbert, W.R., 1974. Pre-bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic stages of organization development. Interpersonal Development, 5(1), pp.1-25.
Verreynne, M.-L. and Meyer, D., 2010. Small business strategy and the industry life cycle. Small Business Economics, 35(4), pp.399-416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9165-3.
Authors
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access. This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0.
Authors who publish with the Quality Innovation Prosperity agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.